While Mr. Romney is not my first choice to be the Republican nominee, I see good in him and am not criticizing you for supporting him. I could see myself voting for him when the primaries come to my state if my first choice candidate is out of the race at that time. However, assault weapons bans are wrong and stupid, and supporting the candidate shouldn't mean trying to justify or rationalize everything that he's done. My first choice is Duncan Hunter, but I have problems with his vote for Sarbanes-Oxley. Even if I end up voting for Mr. Romney, I'll feel ashamed that we've reached a point of having to support someone who supported an assault weapons ban. Even now, I'm ashamed that President Bush supported that nonsense.
Bill
To a certain degree, I agree with you, but some of the stuff on the streets these days is most certainly not what the founders intended when they spoke of the right to keep and bear arms. Even to protect our very lives, some of that stuff is just dumb. Making a choice for POTUS based on this issue alone is not worth all the fuss, but that’s just me.
Well said, Bill. It's the fundamental things that bug me, like the state-mandated health insurance plan he put into place in Massachuests, the confusing of 2nd amendment roots with hunting, the caving to harmful popular movements like Gay Youth Pride Day. I mean, isn't that the kind of wimpy indulgence that is an oxymoron to a person who could really "get" the WOT?
It was Shelbey Steele, I think, who wrote in a recent Hoover Digest the idea that "victory" has to be defined. (Maybe it was Thomas Sowell). I'd like a candidate to define "victory" in the WOT.