The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: twyacht on March 03, 2012, 10:48:34 AM
-
I'll just leave this here.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/03/robert-farago/nra-director-ted-nugent-endorses-mitt-romney/
Ted Nugent Endorses Mitt Romney
Posted on March 3, 2012 by Robert Farago
Ted Nugent has Tweeted his endorsement of presidential candidate Mitt Romney. (Confession: I read it kinda fast and thought the Motor City Madman was endorsing John Goodman.) Given Romney’s Domo Arrigato Mr. Roboto personality, the idea that Uncle Ted had a “heart&soul” with the former Massachusetts governor is a more than a little queasy-making—unless Ted and Mitt Skyped and played Heart and Soul on the piano. Which is an easy enough duet for anyone, really. As a National Rifle Association Director (go figure), Nugent’s nod will surely affect the NRA’s view of the aspiring president and dual shotgun owner. And no I didn’t call the author of Kiss My Glock Shirley. Heaven forfend.
Comments are interesting.
-
Ted, I luv ya but ....YOU'RE WRONG!
-
WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT!!!! I know that the rest aren't great but Romney bragged about HIS AWB when he was gov. Ted, what are you thinking.
-
There are no perfect candidates currently running. Maybe Ted is just backing what he feels is most likely to beat Obama. We do absolutely need to beat Obama! I do believe that a man can change his mind. I hope Mitt has truly changed his about gun control and it is harder to argue about "assault weapons" now that so many are black guns are now used for hunting.
-
Ted, I luv ya but ....YOU'RE WRONG!
WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT!!!! I know that the rest aren't great but Romney bragged about HIS AWB when he was gov. Ted, what are you thinking.
Take that with a grain of salt, it appears it was largely BS put out by the liberal Boston Globe.
Get the other side of the story here.
http://www.aboutmittromney.com/gun_rights.htm
It's also worth noting that Romney is the only candidate who supports making E Verify mandatory.
-
Tom, A pro Romney site is not the most trustworthy source.
Here is GOA on Mitt
Gun Owners of America
Where Does Romney Stand Today on the Second Amendment?
Gun Owners of America today sent an Open Letter to Gov. Mitt Romney, asking him — yet again — to submit his survey responses to GOA.
“We sent you a questionnaire not once, not twice but three times now,” said GOA Vice Chairman Tim Macy.
“What did you send back? A form letter stating you are pro-Second Amendment — with absolutely nothing to back up this laughable claim. As Governor, you were proudly anti-Second Amendment, but as you have with most issues, you have now changed your stripes to spots.”
GOA has posted a description of Romney’s Second Amendment record at: http://gunowners.org/mittromney-2012.htm
In this analysis, you will see his past support for all of Massachusetts’ strict gun control laws, including his support for semi-auto bans and waiting periods.
Mitt Romney said in a recent speech that he was “severely conservative” as Governor of Massachusetts. But if that’s true, then why is he steadfastly refusing to answer the Gun Owners of America questionnaire on Second Amendment issues?
GOA’s Tim Macy asks: “Do you want to clear up this possible misconception I (and most members of Gun Owners of America) have about you? If you do, then call me at (916) 984-1400. Even better, why don’t you fill out one of the THREE GOA questionnaires we’ve sent to you so that millions of American gun owners will know where you stand?”
GOA would ask its members to forward our open letter — which can be read at http://gunowners.org/open-letter-romney.htm — to Gov. Romney.
You may contact Mitt Romney at:
* Email: info@mittromney.com
* Phone: (857) 288-3500
Please let us know of any response you get from Gov. Romney.And be sure to forward the Open Letter to your friends and family.
More from GOA
Tuesday, 22 November 2011 08:20
In the recent Presidential debate, Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann said America’s voters did not need to “settle” for the moderate candidate. Amen to that.
And gun owners do NOT want candidates who talk out of both sides of their mouths.
As the Gun Owners of America’s Board of Directors looks at the Republican candidates running to unseat radical anti-gun President Obama, we see several who have strong pro-gun backgrounds. Ron Paul, Rick Perry, Michelle Bachman all have solid pro-gun records and deserve a hard look from pro-gunners.
At least one frontrunner candidate stands in contrast with a decidedly mixed record on the gun issue. While Mitt Romney likes to “talk the pro-gun talk,” he has not always walked the walk.
“The Second Amendment protects the individual right of lawful citizens to keep and bear arms. I strongly support this essential freedom,” Romney assures gun owners these days.
But this is the same Mitt Romney who, as governor, promised not to do anything to “chip away” at Massachusetts’ extremely restrictive gun laws.
“We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them,” he said during a gubernatorial debate. “I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.”[1]
Even worse, Romney signed a law to permanently ban many semi-automatic firearms. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense,” Romney said in 2004. “They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”[2]
Romney also spoke in favor of the Brady law’s five day waiting period on handguns. The Boston Herald quotes Romney saying, “I don’t think (the waiting period) will have a massive effect on crime but I think it will have a positive effect.”[3]
Mitt Romney doesn’t seem to understand the meaning of “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.”
And that makes it all the more troubling that Romney refuses to answer GOA’s simple candidate questionnaire. In our more than 36 years of experience, a candidate is usually hiding anti-gun views if he or she refuses to come clean in writing with specific commitments to the Second Amendment.
Today, Romney may be a favorite “Republican Establishment” candidate of the national press corps. But that is exactly what gun owners DON’T need in a new President. We need someone who will stand by true constitutional principles and protect the Second Amendment.
[1] Mitt Romney in the 2002 Massachusetts Gubernatorial debate. Part of the quote can be read in this article at Scot Lehigh, “Romney vs. Romney,” Boston Globe (January 19, 2007) at:
http://mittromney4potus.blogspot.com/2007/01/context.html
“Romney signs off on permanent assault weapons ban,” July 8, 2004, at: http://www.iberkshires.com/story.php?story_id=14812
[3] Mitt Romney, quoted by Joe Battenfeld in the Boston Herald, Aug. 1, 1994.
-
Haz, check the source of your news story, it's bs.
Read the endorsements,
http://www.goal.org/
http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html
Legislation: During the Romney Administration, no anti-Second Amendment or anti-sportsmen legislation made its way to the Governor’s desk.
Governor Romney did sign five pro-Second Amendment/pro-sportsmen bills into law. His administration also worked with Gun Owners’ Action League and the Democratic leadership of the Massachusetts House and Senate to remove any anti-Second Amendment language from the Gang Violence bill passed in 2006.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<MORE AT LINK>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
-
Chapter 150 of the Acts of 2004: An Act Further Regulating Certain Weapons
This is a perfect example of don’t believe in titles. The bill was the greatest victory for gun owners since the passage of the gun control laws in 1998 (Chapter 180 of the Acts of 1998). It was a reform bill totally supported by GOAL. Press and media stories around the country got it completely wrong when claimed the bill was an extension of the “assault weapon” ban that had sunset at the federal level. They could not have been more wrong. Unfortunately for the Governor, someone had also wrongly briefed him about the bill. As a result the Lt. Governor and the Governor made statements at the bill signing ceremony that angered GOAL members.
So the only reason Mitt signed the bill was because he thought it restricted "assault weapons" even more.
-
I am no political strategist...but I do believe that by not voting, we will have 4 more years of BHO. A vote for a third party candidate elects BHO as well. I am certainly tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. With BHO we all know what we are going to get...BOHICA! Like my mother always said, "You don't have to like it, you just have to do it." The stakes are too high. Vote often and vote early (only if you live in Chicago)
-
Mittens ain't the best on Judicial Appointees either, and this is all cited from a Mass. Resident from Mass. resources...
http://www.amycontrada.com/Romney_s_Judiciary.html
snip
Most of Governor Romney’s judicial appointees were not conservative. The Boston Globe’s July 2005 “review … of Romney's judicial picks detected no philosophical or partisan pattern.” He “passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced [as of July 2005], instead tapping registered Democrats or independents including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights.” [3]
Lengthy work cited FACTS about The windsock Ken Doll...and his Judiciary Appt.
-
Take that with a grain of salt, it appears it was largely BS put out by the liberal Boston Globe.
Get the other side of the story here.
http://www.aboutmittromney.com/gun_rights.htm
It's also worth noting that Romney is the only candidate who supports making E Verify mandatory.
Tom, I was watching the debate. It came straight out of his mouth.
-
Since when does it matter what a politician says any more? They're all a bunch of lying a-holes anyway!
Just tell me who to vote for on November 6th! It's only the country at stake, nothing really important ya know?
Find someone else, we have nine months to give birth to the savior of the Free World!
-
I've never understood the whole concept of endorsments. If you're so feeble-minded that you base your vote on who somebody else told you to vote for, you shouldn't be voting.
-
I am no political strategist...but I do believe that by not voting, we will have 4 more years of BHO. A vote for a third party candidate elects BHO as well.
Depends on where you live. The Pres is based on electoral votes, so I would ignore the above unless you live in a swing state. Just don't forget that there are a scad of other elections out there that day. Leave the President line blank if it makes you feel better. Hell, write in "Alf the Wonder Beagle" for all I care. Just remember those other elections.
-
I've never understood the whole concept of endorsments. If you're so feeble-minded that you base your vote on who somebody else told you to vote for, you shouldn't be voting.
That is not exactly true, most voters don't actually know crap about any of the major issues, let alone all of them so they support people who have the support of people they agree with.
http://news.yahoo.com/cantor-endorses-romney-092305879.html
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor endorsed Mitt Romney for president on Sunday because, he said, Romney is the best candidate to improve the economy.
"Mitt Romney is the only candidate who has a pro-growth, pro-jobs plan for the future," Cantor said on NBC's Meet the Press. He added: "[Romney] will best be able to lead this economy back to a growth mode."
Throughout his interview, Cantor attempted to focus on the economy, and praised Romney as being the only candidate to put forth a "bold plan" to increase jobs and reduce regulatory red tape.
>>>>>>>>>>>MORE AT LINK<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
-
I'm surprised that Cantor could get a word in edgewise with that a-hole David Gregory! Tim Russert he ain't!
I'm nearly screaming at the TV when I watch Meet the Press! Whatever happened to impartial journalism?
OH! Wait! Nevermind....I forgot it's NBC.... ::)
-
That is not exactly true, most voters don't actually know crap about any of the major issues, let alone all of them so they support people who have the support of people they agree with.
Which part of what I said are you disagreeing with? Based on what you said, I still say they shouldn't be allowed to vote.
-
Which part of what I said are you disagreeing with? Based on what you said, I still say they shouldn't be allowed to vote.
The bit about not understanding endorsements.
The to dumb to vote part I agree wholeheartedly.
Unfortunately not only do they vote, but the parties prefer them because they are butt stupid.
But even some voters who are well informed on some issues go by the endorsements on others they are less informed about.
Many on here could talk for hours on the ins and outs of gun laws and the 2A, debt reduction, or tort reform on the other hand may be outside their experience.
-
I'm going to endorse the guy most likely to win the nomination because I want to be on the winning side. Mitt has great hair, is a snappy dresser and is filthy rich plus he has out spent the others by at least 10 to 1. So is that shallow enough to make a choice?
Romney plans to grow Government at a slower rate then Obama and is basically neutral about the 2nd Amendment, like Bush if the political winds favor more restrictions he will follow along. I just keep remembering that every time a Moderate gets the nomination the Democratic candidate wins because there is not enough difference to motivate more conservatives to vote.
-
Mittens has spent $63,650,764 as of Jan 31st 2012.
http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/campaign-finance
Tell me, other than politics where do you spend tens of millions of dollars for a job that only pays $400,000?
Yea, politicians are smarter, right. ::)
-
I'm going to endorse the guy most likely to win the nomination because I want to be on the winning side. Mitt has great hair, is a snappy dresser and is filthy rich plus he has out spent the others by at least 10 to 1. So is that shallow enough to make a choice?
Romney plans to grow Government at a slower rate then Obama and is basically neutral about the 2nd Amendment, like Bush if the political winds favor more restrictions he will follow along. I just keep remembering that every time a Moderate gets the nomination the Democratic candidate wins because there is not enough difference to motivate more conservatives to vote.
+1
-
Mittens has spent $63,650,764 as of Jan 31st 2012.
http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/campaign-finance
Tell me, other than politics where do you spend tens of millions of dollars for a job that only pays $400,000?
Yea, politicians are smarter, right. ::)
It's that $1m an appearance on the speaking circuit afterwards.
-
Uncle Ted just posted this on his Facebook page. I offer it without comment.
Ted Nugent
I know many of you disagree, I respectuflly beseach you all to reconsider, and join me to rid the US gvt of the gang of enemies infesting our great country. After much heart & soul searching research & prayer, I gave the greenlight to the Romney team to pass my ph# to Mitt Romney, and he called me today. We spoke at length. Im sure I dont have to repeat what I said to him here, surely self evident truths are universally known & understood here. That being said, I demanded and he indeed did pledge the following- 1-no more restrictions on any gun or ammo ownership, no AWB bullshit, and that he would push with us to eliminate all anti 2A restrictions currently in place. 2- he would stand with us solidly for we the people hunting, fishing & trapping rights, fighting to backdown the feds from wasting tax dollars slaughtering our wildlife with our tax dollars instead of the rightful owners of said wildlife rights to utilize them as assets instead of forced bureaucrat liabilities. He also vowed to stack the SCOTUS with Constitution respecting Americans. For a change. We spoke of other critical upgrades, and I felt good about his proclaiments. So I officially endorsed him for POTUS. Plz take a deep breath, think hard, and join me for the fight of our lives for the soul of America.
Thank you, Ted
-
I'm shocked--shocked that Mittens the Windsock told Uncle Ted what he wanted to hear.
-
Than you for that post tt.
Regardless of the infighting, the issue is not WHO the Rep. candidate is....
It is removing the current POTUS...
ANY candidate has to be supported to simply defeat BHO......Regardless... Ted is not a dumb ass, he spoke his peace, and expressed his concerns....Whether Mitt too it seriously or not, he is on the record and will be held to account.
Whether by tar, pitchforks, and feathers.....
-
sure would be nice if Mitt had make his promises and commitments to Chuck Norris also....everyone knows Chuck would be 'watching'
-
Are we all just supposed to look at this and say "Well, okay, since Ted said so", without looking at what Romney actually said and did for all those years? How am I supposed to do that without being the same as the sheep/ones who created the problem we find ourselves in in the first place?
-
Are we all just supposed to look at this and say "Well, okay, since Ted said so", without looking at what Romney actually said and did for all those years? How am I supposed to do that without being the same as the sheep/ones who created the problem we find ourselves in in the first place?
As with any endorsement, the endorser does so because they feel that the endorsement, not necessarily the endorsee, will further the endorser's agenda.
You don't actually need to understand the endorsee, just the endorser and their agenda and decide how you like that agenda.
-
I hope Uncle Ted realizes that Romney winning the GOP primary will guarantee another four years of Obama....I haven't seen too many voters who will bother to go to the polls for him....
-
The Ruling class selected Mittens at the start of the nomination process and anyone else is unacceptable. We saw that in 2010 when Tea Party nominees couldn't get the endorsement of big name Republicans against RINOs.
I've known all along that I would vote for the Republican candidate even if I had to hold my nose when I did it. George Soros said he has no problem with a Romney Presidency. Kind of gets you right here :'(.
-
Whether Mitt too it seriously or not, he is on the record and will be held to account.
Whether by tar, pitchforks, and feathers.....
(emphasis mine)
So, Republicans are going to do something they haven't done since '92? Cool!