I dont like either one of them, but my facts are solid.
"On May 22, 2009, President Barack Obama signed H.R. 627, the "Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009," into law. The bill contained an amendment introduced by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) that prohibits the Secretary of the Interior from enacting or enforcing any regulations that restrict possession of firearms in National Parks"
Laws have to be signed by a President within a fairly brief time frame, I think before 10 days have expired after the law is
sent by Congress to the President's desk. Otherwise, the law is effectively vetoed. It is called a "pocket veto" because the Prez keeps the law unsigned in his pocket -so to speak-- till the clock runs. In other words, O signed the law.
Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.
On Nov. 6, vote for the best loser.
It isn't just guns with Romney. He reinvented himself in about 2006. He was a liberal Republican prior to that point. Of course, he was in MA, and that's the only way a Republican is going to get elected. After George Allen lost his reelection bid in VA an opening was created. Prior to that Allen was the presumptive front runner for the "right wing" of the GOP in the 2008 primary. Everyone thought it would be Allen and McCain fighting one another. With Allen losing a spot was open and Romney dropped the liberalism and turned hard right. He's a a politician and will do what he believes he needs to do in order to get elected.
I have a feeling the true Romney is somewhere in the middle of the two people we've seen. I do know he couldn't be any worse for the Second Amendment than Obama, who has made it clear he was waiting until reelection wasn't a concern to truly attack gun rights. But this is one of those times where being a single issue voter would be a bad thing. Since I'm voting on where candidates fit on many issues and not one in particular, Romney is clearly the right choice for me. His foreign policy ideas and economic plans are where they need to be. In reality those two will keep him busy enough to make gun rights a distant thought in a Romney administration.
Neither candidate can be trusted with the 2nd amendment.
If an AWB bill came across the president's desk, whether it was Obama or Romney, it would get signed.
They'll say whatever it takes to get elected, afterward all bets are off.
OK Post Delete #1 & Counting.....Please Stay On Topic. 2nd Amendment - NRA endorsement - Firearms.
Thread like this are a waste. You can not post what Obama has flat out said all his life( HIS quotes) about the subject without being edit or deleted so what is the use of it.
Honestly, the only thing that is beneficial to having Romney president is that he most likely will try to appoint SCOTUS judges who will be more in line with what gun owners think when it comes to the 2A. But tha is a crap shoot as we have all seen over the decades with critical votes being decided by an appointee that went "the other way".
My apologies to the moderator(s) for my earlier attempt to make a point with comparative sarcasm. IMHO, with regards to the 2nd Amendment, both candidates (deep in their respective hearts) believe in gun control. Both candidates are serving "Kool Aid" to the electorate to try & make us believe otherwise. No matter which one we collectively pick...it's still Kool Aid.
issues with no logical connection whatsoever.
So, a few weeks back I was chatting with a fellow who has been a professional big game hunter, who still lives on mostly deer meat obtained the old fashioned way, using a bolt action rifle, and who uses a wood burning stove for a significant portion of the
New England heating season.
This old gent has a CHL, has been a life long NRA member (is in his 70s now). As one might surmise from the above comment has hunted everything from deer to bear to leopard; on several continents.
The conversation turned to something the NRA sent him about "death taxes." Well, not only are such matters
quite unrelated to guns, they scared the heck out of him because he mistakenly thought (based on the communication
from the NRA) that his rather modest estate would be taxed on his death. He was quite relieved when I was able to
explain to him that estate taxes won't touch him, or me, and he had nothing to fear from "death taxes."
IMO NRA's advocacy for gun owners could be significantly enhanced if they stayed the heck out of partisan politics and
and non-gun related policy matters. I think they really don't comprehend that they are shooting
their credibility and effectiveness as advocates for gun owners in the foot with these tactics.
No endorsement should have been made by them.
In my case my minds made up so don't try to confuse me with the facts, I'm just waiting for the time I can shoot up all my stocked piled ammo in a target rich environment!