Robinson Arms Backs Mitt Romney. Are You Guys Kidding?!! > General Discussion

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:06:43 AM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
So let me see if I understand this, then....

Robinson (who claims to have been working closely with Romney for the better part of a year and who also claims to have received assurances on the RKBA from Romney despite a spotty (at best) past) decides to come out in support for the guy.

All hell breaks loose.

During the hullabaloo, a tape of Romney on some news show pops up, to which Robinson admits not being aware of. He states he will contact Romney immediately and, if Romney does not openly support the RKBA and AW's, he will withdraw his prior support.

In other words, Robinson supported a candidate based on the information he had (and which some of us didn't), and when presented with additional information he DIDN'T have, immediately moves to confirm it and to verify that his candidate does, in fact support Robinson's position, with the caveat that if the support isn't there, he'll withdraw the endorsement.

Why is anyone pissed at this? Seems to me he's trying to do the right thing.

Anyone who claims that Rudy or Romney are not, and have not been anti-gun is either turning a blind eye or dumb.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:07:10 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
So let me see if I understand this, then....

Robinson (who claims to have been working closely with Romney for the better part of a year and who also claims to have received assurances on the RKBA from Romney despite a spotty (at best) past) decides to come out in support for the guy.

All hell breaks loose.

During the hullabaloo, a tape of Romney on some news show pops up, to which Robinson admits not being aware of. He states he will contact Romney immediately and, if Romney does not openly support the RKBA and AW's, he will withdraw his prior support.

In other words, Robinson supported a candidate based on the information he had (and which some of us didn't), and when presented with additional information he DIDN'T have, immediately moves to confirm it and to verify that his candidate does, in fact support Robinson's position, with the caveat that if the support isn't there, he'll withdraw the endorsement.

Why is anyone pissed at this? Seems to me he's trying to do the right thing.

This....

E-mailed response from Alex at Robinson Arms

David:

Thanks for the courteous reply.

What you don't know is that we've been working with Mitt since early
2007.

We're aware of his previous actions.

So which is it? He can't claim to NOT knowing about Mitt's previous stances...and then say he's been working closely with Mitt and that he knows about Mitt's previous gun-banning tendencies.

He's now lying and attempting to have it both ways. In this age, the information age where the internet provides instant communication and the ability to save said information, you cannot do what he is doing and get away with it.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:07:14 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Why is everyone flaming a guy for making a decision? It is HIS company and HIS right to speak freely - just like the rest of us. Hell, I may not agree with his political choice - but I admire a guy who is willing to stand up for what he believes is right.

This is no different than pulling a trigger. You can't bring the bullet back - so you simply deal with your actions and move forward.

Live and let live

Post count: 1

The guy with the troll account talks about someone standing up for what he believes in

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:07:27 AM EDT

[#4]

from the website;
I do still believe that in general Mitt Romney is the most qualified candidate for President. However, if he will not state unequivocally that he will protect and not ban our beloved assault rifles, I will not be able to continue to support him

To me this is not about protecting our beloved assault rifles, but about how this presidential candidate interprets the Constitution. To me, any candidate who equates the 2nd Amendment with "your right to hunt" has a flawed understanding of the intentions of the framers of the Constitution, and is in fact is NOT the most qualified for the office. If a candidate fails to understand why the 2nd Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights, then that candidate is disqualified, in my opinion.
It is also a matter of trust. I can not trust a person to hold the highest elected office in this country if that person does not trust me and my fellow citizens to be well armed. I will not vote for a candidate who fears an armed population, regardless of the stated reasons for that fear, which in Mr. Romney's case is an apparent belief in an exaggerated, over-sensationalized, statistically non-existent problem.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:08:17 AM EDT

[#5]

In other words, Robinson supported a candidate based on the information he had (and which some of us didn't), and when presented with additional information he DIDN'T have, immediately moves to confirm it and to verify that his candidate does, in fact support Robinson's position, with the caveat that if the support isn't there, he'll withdraw the endorsement.

Why is anyone pissed at this? Seems to me he's trying to do the right thing.

Because Romney was either lying then or he will be lying now if he tells Alex that he will not ban assault weapons. Only a fool would believe him if Romney reversed himself now.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:08:47 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Why is everyone flaming a guy for making a decision? It is HIS company and HIS right to speak freely - just like the rest of us. Hell, I may not agree with his political choice - but I admire a guy who is willing to stand up for what he believes is right.

This is no different than pulling a trigger. You can't bring the bullet back - so you simply deal with your actions and move forward.

Live and let live.

BWAHAHAHA. Whose troll account is this???

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:09:13 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Religion bashing will result in the suspension of your user account. Guaranteed.

I already banned one person in this thread (along with his two user accounts).

Everyone knows the rules. It's your choice to follow them. We sincerely hope you do.

what were his two other accounts? anyone famous?

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:10:19 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:

In other words, Robinson supported a candidate based on the information he had (and which some of us didn't), and when presented with additional information he DIDN'T have, immediately moves to confirm it and to verify that his candidate does, in fact support Robinson's position, with the caveat that if the support isn't there, he'll withdraw the endorsement.

Why is anyone pissed at this? Seems to me he's trying to do the right thing.

Because Romney was either lying then or he will be lying now if he tells Alex that he will not ban assault weapons. Only a fool would believe him if Romney reversed himself now.

Exactly.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:10:22 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Why is everyone flaming a guy for making a decision? It is HIS company and HIS right to speak freely - just like the rest of us. Hell, I may not agree with his political choice - but I admire a guy who is willing to stand up for what he believes is right.

This is no different than pulling a trigger. You can't bring the bullet back - so you simply deal with your actions and move forward.

Live and let live.

It is his right to make the decision. It is his right to announce his decision to the world.

It is my right to denounce his decision as folly. It is my right to say I will not being doing business with someone who makes such decisions.

Just because you cant bring the bullet back does not mean you should not be held accountable for what that bullet does.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:12:52 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Why is everyone flaming a guy for making a decision? It is HIS company and HIS right to speak freely - just like the rest of us. Hell, I may not agree with his political choice - but I admire a guy who is willing to stand up for what he believes is right.

This is no different than pulling a trigger. You can't bring the bullet back - so you simply deal with your actions and move forward.

Live and let live.

Yes, it is his company. However, we are a collective pool of potential customers for him. Poisoning one's relation with potential customers is never a good idea.

When he posted his support officially on his company's website, and also in the industry forum, he pulled politics and business together. When a business owner does that he has to be prepared to face the consequences, good or bad.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:13:17 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Why is everyone flaming a guy for making a decision? It is HIS company and HIS right to speak freely - just like the rest of us. Hell, I may not agree with his political choice - but I admire a guy who is willing to stand up for what he believes is right.

This is no different than pulling a trigger. You can't bring the bullet back - so you simply deal with your actions and move forward.

Live and let live.

It is his right to make the decision. It is his right to announce his decision to the world.

It is my right to denounce his decision as folly. It is my right to say I will not being doing business with someone who makes such decisions.

Just because you cant bring the bullet back does not mean you should not be held accountable for what that bullet does.

+1

No one is saying he should be fined or imprisoned or executed; of course he has the right. All we're saying is that we are shocked at what we are seeing.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:13:31 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Why is everyone flaming a guy for making a decision? It is HIS company and HIS right to speak freely - just like the rest of us. Hell, I may not agree with his political choice - but I admire a guy who is willing to stand up for what he believes is right.

This is no different than pulling a trigger. You can't bring the bullet back - so you simply deal with your actions and move forward.

Live and let live

Post count: 1

The guy with the troll account talks about someone standing up for what he believes in

now that is funny right there.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:13:37 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
You missed this:

Quoted:
E-mailed response from Alex at Robinson Arms

David:

Thanks for the courteous reply.

What you don't know is that we've been working with Mitt since early
2007.

We're aware of his previous actions.

We're also aware that he's
since become an NRA member and has come up with a very clear cut
statement on the Second Amendment.

He's most likely to get the Republican nomination. I'd rather have him
than any of the Democrats. He's vowed to take care of us.

Who do you support and what have you done to make sure he gets elected?

All comments are greatly appreciated.

Alex

And you seem to have missed THAT.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:14:34 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You missed this:

Quoted:
E-mailed response from Alex at Robinson Arms

David:

Thanks for the courteous reply.

What you don't know is that we've been working with Mitt since early
2007.

We're aware of his previous actions.

We're also aware that he's
since become an NRA member and has come up with a very clear cut
statement on the Second Amendment.

He's most likely to get the Republican nomination. I'd rather have him
than any of the Democrats. He's vowed to take care of us.

Who do you support and what have you done to make sure he gets elected?

All comments are greatly appreciated.

Alex

And you seem to have missed THAT.

Please...$10 and a dream

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:15:53 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You missed this:

Quoted:
E-mailed response from Alex at Robinson Arms

David:

Thanks for the courteous reply.

What you don't know is that we've been working with Mitt since early
2007.

We're aware of his previous actions.

We're also aware that he's
since become an NRA member and has come up with a very clear cut
statement on the Second Amendment.

He's most likely to get the Republican nomination. I'd rather have him
than any of the Democrats. He's vowed to take care of us.

Who do you support and what have you done to make sure he gets elected?

All comments are greatly appreciated.

Alex

And you seem to have missed THAT.

His "clear cut" statement on the 2A involved an AWB and "no guns for the crazies".

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:16:02 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Anyone who claims that Rudy or Romney are not, and have not been anti-gun is either turning a blind eye or dumb.

I'm not saying that either one hasn't been, or even that they aren't now.

However, if someone has a change of heart and publicly says so, why should it be automatically discounted?

I used to be pro-choice, pro-AWB, pro-big government. Then I woke up.

What if, just perhaps, Romney has had a similar awakening since MA, and Robinson knows about it?

If he HASN'T, of course, then Robinson is wrong (and will presumably withdraw the endorsement), and Romney can go spit.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:16:57 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You missed this:

Quoted:
E-mailed response from Alex at Robinson Arms

David:

Thanks for the courteous reply.

What you don't know is that we've been working with Mitt since early
2007.

We're aware of his previous actions.

We're also aware that he's
since become an NRA member and has come up with a very clear cut
statement on the Second Amendment.

He's most likely to get the Republican nomination. I'd rather have him
than any of the Democrats. He's vowed to take care of us.

Who do you support and what have you done to make sure he gets elected?

All comments are greatly appreciated.

Alex

And you seem to have missed THAT.

lol did you miss the meet the press video? would someone be kind enough to re-link it again so zaphod can watch it?

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:17:01 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You missed this:

Quoted:
E-mailed response from Alex at Robinson Arms

David:

Thanks for the courteous reply.

What you don't know is that we've been working with Mitt since early
2007.

We're aware of his previous actions.

We're also aware that he's
since become an NRA member and has come up with a very clear cut
statement on the Second Amendment.

He's most likely to get the Republican nomination. I'd rather have him
than any of the Democrats. He's vowed to take care of us.

Who do you support and what have you done to make sure he gets elected?

All comments are greatly appreciated.

Alex

And you seem to have missed THAT.

Yeah, he made a clear cut statement on the second ammendment alright.

You did see the "Meet the Press" interview? Pretty clear cut to me.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:17:18 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Boycott.

Would be kind of ironic if his company went bankrupt even before Romney could shut it down, wouldn't it?

Mormon>your business

Just like those crafty Jews, eh?

You don't have clean hands. Mountain Meadows Massacre

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:17:42 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Anyone who claims that Rudy or Romney are not, and have not been anti-gun is either turning a blind eye or dumb.

I'm not saying that either one hasn't been, or even that they aren't now.

However, if someone has a change of heart and publicly says so, why should it be automatically discounted?

I used to be pro-choice, pro-AWB, pro-big government. Then I woke up.

What if, just perhaps, Romney has had a similar awakening since MA, and Robinson knows about it?

If he HASN'T, of course, then Robinson is wrong (and will presumably withdraw the endorsement), and Romney can go spit.

Unfortunately, his actions have spoken for him.

WHY would anyone be willing to take the chance that he MAY have had a change of heart?

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:17:48 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You missed this:

Quoted:
E-mailed response from Alex at Robinson Arms

David:

What you don't know is that we've been working with Mitt since early
2007.

We're aware of his previous actions.

We're also aware that he's
since become an NRA member and has come up with a very clear cut
statement on the Second Amendment.

He's most likely to get the Republican nomination. I'd rather have him
than any of the Democrats. He's vowed to take care of us.

Alex

And you seem to have missed THAT.

And you seem to have missed precisely what Mitt's "clear cut statment" was:

Watch from 1:00 to 2:00 and see what Mitt said TWO WEEKS AGO

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:18:04 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
Please...$10 and a dream

Oh! Could very well be! Believe me, I'm no Romney supporter, by any real stretch.

I'm just willing to see where the facts come down before I string people from a tree.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:19:01 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
And you seem to have missed precisely what Mitt's "clear cut statment" was:

Watch from 1:00 to 2:00 and see what Mitt said TWO WEEKS AGO

Sorry, Gobby, but I don't do YouTube at work.

Please enlighten me. Facts are facts. I'll listen.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:19:41 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Please...$10 and a dream

Oh! Could very well be! Believe me, I'm no Romney supporter, by any real stretch.

I'm just willing to see where the facts come down before I string people from a tree.

The facts could not be any clearer...

Romney IS a gun grabber, period.

The only thing worse here, is that Robarms KNOWS this, and supports him anyway.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:19:58 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Anyone who claims that Rudy or Romney are not, and have not been anti-gun is either turning a blind eye or dumb.

I'm not saying that either one hasn't been, or even that they aren't now.

However, if someone has a change of heart and publicly says so, why should it be automatically discounted?

I used to be pro-choice, pro-AWB, pro-big government. Then I woke up.

What if, just perhaps, Romney has had a similar awakening since MA, and Robinson knows about it?

If he HASN'T, of course, then Robinson is wrong (and will presumably withdraw the endorsement), and Romney can go spit.

Are you really willing to take that gamble with your rights and our country's future that Romney isn't just pandering and that he has really had some sort of an epiphany? Would you believe Hillary if she had the same epiphany at election time too?

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:21:11 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Are you really willing to take that gamble with your rights and our country's future that Romney isn't just pandering and that he has really had some sort of an epiphany? Would you believe Hillary if she had the same epiphany at election time too?

I would be more willing to believe Romney than Hillary.

I would still prefer Romney to Hillary.

Doesn't mean Romney is the best or favorite choice, either.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:21:54 AM EDT

[#27]

MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to gun control. Here's the headline: "Romney retreats on gun control. Romney, who once described himself as a supporter of strong gun laws, is distancing himself from that rhetoric now as he attempts to court the gun owners who make up a significant force in Republican primary politics. In his '94" Senate race, Romney backed two gun-control measures strongly opposed by the National Rife Association and other" guns rights "groups: the Brady Bill, which imposed a five-day waiting period on gun sales, and a ban on certain assault weapons. `That's not going to make me the hero of the NRA,' Romney told the Boston Herald.'" "At another campaign stop" "he told reporters, `I don't line up with the NRA.'" Suddenly Romney decides to run for president and signs up for a lifetime membership in the NRA.

GOV. ROMNEY: You know, it's, it's wonderful, and you'll appreciate this. There is a great effort on the part of, in some cases, my opposition, in some cases, just folks that are interested in writing an interesting article to, to try and find any change at all. And my position on guns is the same position I've had for a long, long time. And, and that position is that I don't line up 100 percent with the NRA. I don't see eye to eye with the NRA on every issue. I...

MR. RUSSERT: You're still for the Brady Bill?

GOV. ROMNEY: I supported the assault weapon ban. I...

MR. RUSSERT: You're for it?

GOV. ROMNEY: I assigned--and I--let me, let me describe it.

MR. RUSSERT: But you're still for it.

GOV. ROMNEY: Let's describe what it is. I signed--I would have supported the original assault weapon ban. I signed an assault weapon ban in Massachusetts governor because it provided for a relaxation of licensing requirements for gun owners in Massachusetts, which was a big plus. And so both the pro-gun and the anti-gun lobby came together with a bill, and I signed that. And if there is determined to be, from time to time, a weapon of such lethality that it poses a grave risk to our law enforcement personnel, that's something I would consider signing. There's nothing of that nature that's being proposed today in Washington. But, but I would, I would look at weapons that pose extraordinary lethality...

MR. RUSSERT: So the assault ban that expired here because Congress didn't act on it, you would support?

GOV. ROMNEY: Just as the president said, he would have, he would have signed that bill if it came to his desk, and so would have I. And, and, and yet I also was pleased to have the support of the NRA when I ran for governor. I sought it, I seek it now. I'd love to have their support. I believe in the right of Americans to bear arms...

MR. RUSSERT: How about the Brady Bill?

GOV. ROMNEY: The Brady Bill has changed over time, and, of course, technology has changed over time.

MR. RUSSERT: But the idea of a waiting period.

Story continues below ↓
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
advertisement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GOV. ROMNEY: Well, we have, we have a background check. That's the key thing. I support background checks to, to--for people who are going into a store or whatever and buying a weapon, I want them to have a background check to make sure...

MR. RUSSERT: But you stand by your support of the Brady Bill.

GOV. ROMNEY: ...to make sure, to make sure that the, that the crazies don't buy guns.

The, the current Brady Bill is, is a different measure than the original. The original had a waiting period because it took a long time to check on people's backgrounds. Today we can check instantly on backgrounds. I don't want to cause a waiting period that's not necessary based upon today's technology. But my position is we should check on the backgrounds of people who are trying to purchase guns. We also should keep weapons of unusual lethality from being on the street. And finally, we should go after people who use guns in the commission of crimes or illegally, but we should not interfere with the right of law-abiding citizens to own guns either for their own personal protection or hunting or any other lawful purpose. I support the work of the NRA. I'm a member of the NRA. But do we line up on every issue? No, we don't.

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22273924/page/5/

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:23:30 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:

Quoted:
And you seem to have missed precisely what Mitt's "clear cut statment" was:

Watch from 1:00 to 2:00 and see what Mitt said TWO WEEKS AGO

Sorry, Gobby, but I don't do YouTube at work.

Please enlighten me. Facts are facts. I'll listen.

Mitt says on "Meet the Press" that he supported the original AWB, that he supported GWB's position on reauthorizing the AWB (and that he would sign a new AWB), that he has a clear record of supporting gun owner rights while governor of MA (

), and that he would support any new efforts to ban firearms if they were deemed too dangerous.

National television. Two weeks ago. You can't get any more clear-cut than that.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:23:54 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You missed this:

Quoted:
E-mailed response from Alex at Robinson Arms

David:

What you don't know is that we've been working with Mitt since early
2007.

We're aware of his previous actions.

We're also aware that he's
since become an NRA member and has come up with a very clear cut
statement on the Second Amendment.

He's most likely to get the Republican nomination. I'd rather have him
than any of the Democrats. He's vowed to take care of us.

Alex

And you seem to have missed THAT.

And you seem to have missed precisely what Mitt's "clear cut statment" was:

Watch from 1:00 to 2:00 and see what Mitt said TWO WEEKS AGO

"Weapons of unusual lethality" is what the catchphrase will be for the next assault weapon ban with this slimy douchebag in the White House.

Does ANYONE doubt that?

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:24:49 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You missed this:

Quoted:
E-mailed response from Alex at Robinson Arms

David:

What you don't know is that we've been working with Mitt since early
2007.

We're aware of his previous actions.

We're also aware that he's
since become an NRA member and has come up with a very clear cut
statement on the Second Amendment.

He's most likely to get the Republican nomination. I'd rather have him
than any of the Democrats. He's vowed to take care of us.

Alex

And you seem to have missed THAT.

And you seem to have missed precisely what Mitt's "clear cut statment" was:

Watch from 1:00 to 2:00 and see what Mitt said TWO WEEKS AGO

"Weapons of unusual lethality" is what the catchphrase will be for the next assault weapon ban with this slimy douchebag in the White House.

Does ANYONE doubt that?

Not me

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:25:10 AM EDT

[#31]

Oh, dear..... THAT was said just two weeks ago?

My, my, my...... we ARE fooked.

Well, there's the facts..... Thanks.

ETA: Yeah, I chaffed at the "unusual lethality" phrase, too. You mean there's such a thing as "usual" lethality?

I wish Thompson would get off his ass and run like he meant it.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:25:56 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Boycott.

Would be kind of ironic if his company went bankrupt even before Romney could shut it down, wouldn't it?

Mormon>your business

Just like those crafty Jews, eh?

You don't have clean hands. Mountain Meadows Massacre

Honestly, that's ridiculous. I'm well acquainted with Mormon history, but injecting that into this discussion serves no purpose other than flat out Mormon bashing. Totally unnecessary.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:26:30 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You missed this:

Quoted:
E-mailed response from Alex at Robinson Arms

David:

What you don't know is that we've been working with Mitt since early
2007.

We're aware of his previous actions.

We're also aware that he's
since become an NRA member and has come up with a very clear cut
statement on the Second Amendment.

He's most likely to get the Republican nomination. I'd rather have him
than any of the Democrats. He's vowed to take care of us.

Alex

And you seem to have missed THAT.

And you seem to have missed precisely what Mitt's "clear cut statment" was:

Watch from 1:00 to 2:00 and see what Mitt said TWO WEEKS AGO

"Weapons of unusual lethality" is what the catchphrase will be for the next assault weapon ban with this slimy douchebag in the White House.

Does ANYONE doubt that?

none who remember the past doubt it.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:26:52 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Are you really willing to take that gamble with your rights and our country's future that Romney isn't just pandering and that he has really had some sort of an epiphany? Would you believe Hillary if she had the same epiphany at election time too?

I would be more willing to believe Romney than Hillary.

I would still prefer Romney to Hillary.

Doesn't mean Romney is the best or favorite choice, either.

Why do you give Romney the benefit of the doubt when it comes to "waking up" just as you did over Hillary doing the same thing?

They are really the same candidate imo. Willing to say whatever it takes to get elected because all they want is the power that comes with the office.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:27:40 AM EDT

[#35]

Who cares what religion he is?

Honestly?

Good and bad people come from every religion.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:27:42 AM EDT

[#36]

Did you send Robinson an email?

Since your a customer you should ..

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:27:50 AM EDT

[#37]

It's also very important to note that this is the interview where Romney apparently BLATANTLY LIES about the NRA supporting him in his last election.

If you listen, he claims that the NRA supported him. But they did not.

When he is put on the spot, this guy will lie.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:28:52 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
Oh, dear..... THAT was said just two weeks ago?

My, my, my...... we ARE fooked.

Well, there's the facts..... Thanks.

ETA: Yeah, I chaffed at the "unusual lethality" phrase, too. You mean there's such a thing as "usual" lethality?

I wish Thompson would get off his ass and run like he meant it.

Yup.

They might as well endorse Hitlery. Atleast we'll get heath care.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:30:13 AM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
It's also very important to note that this is the interview where Romney apparently BLATANTLY LIES about the NRA supporting him in his last election.

If you listen, he claims that the NRA supported him. But they did not.

When he is put on the spot, this guy will lie.

Whoa, not good.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:30:35 AM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
It's also very important to note that this is the interview where Romney apparently BLATANTLY LIES about the NRA supporting him in his last election.

If you listen, he claims that the NRA supported him. But they did not.

When he is put on the spot, this guy will lie.

I posted the transcript above in case you guys missed it.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:30:40 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
It's also very important to note that this is the interview where Romney apparently BLATANTLY LIES about the NRA supporting him in his last election.

If you listen, he claims that the NRA supported him. But they did not.

When he is put on the spot, this guy will lie.

His dad marched with King too...

IF he could have been at two places at once that is...

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:31:25 AM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
It's also very important to note that this is the interview where Romney apparently BLATANTLY LIES about the NRA supporting him in his last election.

If you listen, he claims that the NRA supported him. But they did not.

When he is put on the spot, this guy will lie.

+1

However, let's remember that our focus is on Robarms right now, not Romney.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:31:37 AM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:

ETA: Yeah, I chaffed at the "unusual lethality" phrase, too. You mean there's such a thing as "usual" lethality?

Exactly.

There is simply no doubt that an AR15 or AK type rifle (or anything that has a military look to it and a detatchable magazine and pistol grip) will be described as a firearm of "unusual lethality" (since nobody NEEDS that much firepower, right?) - and hunting rifles and shotguns will be described as "acceptable" firearms.

He's basically describing how he is 100% behind an assault weapon ban, but using political double-speak to do it.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:32:01 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
Willing to say whatever it takes to get elected because all they want is the power that comes with the office.

If they "change their mind" for that purpose, I agree. If they REALLY change it, then why not?

I've changed my position on many things, only I've done so legitimately. I don't believe Hillary believes in anything but herself.

I don't know Romney that well, however, and am at least willing to entertain the thought. However, if he said what he said just that recently, then he's obviously hedging.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:32:15 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Oh, dear..... THAT was said just two weeks ago?

My, my, my...... we ARE fooked.

Well, there's the facts..... Thanks.

ETA: Yeah, I chaffed at the "unusual lethality" phrase, too. You mean there's such a thing as "usual" lethality?

I wish Thompson would get off his ass and run like he meant it.

Yup.

They might as well endorse Hitlery. Atleast we'll get heath care.

Dont worry Mitt'll give us health care too, He used to brag about the Massachusetts health care plan he signed...

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:32:55 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
and hunting rifles and shotguns will be described as "acceptable" firearms.

Until the NEXT ban.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:33:00 AM EDT

[#47]

You wont get a straight answer from Rommney.

Every single time I emailed him through his site about specifics concerning 2A support, specifically military type rifles I got a message saying there was an error sending the message

I tried 4 more time over a month + and always got the same response

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:33:51 AM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
You wont get a straight answer from Rommney.

Every single time I emailed him through his site about specifics concerning 2A support, specifically military type rifles I got a message saying there was an error sending the message
I tried 4 more time over a month + and always got the same response

bzzzt DOES NOT COMPUTE

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:34:33 AM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:

Quoted:
and hunting rifles and shotguns will be described as "acceptable" firearms.

Until the NEXT ban.

Yep. Nobody needs "ultra-accurate" sniper rifles, either.

Posted: 1/3/2008 7:34:46 AM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's also very important to note that this is the interview where Romney apparently BLATANTLY LIES about the NRA supporting him in his last election.

If you listen, he claims that the NRA supported him. But they did not.

When he is put on the spot, this guy will lie.

His dad marched with King too...

IF he could have been at two places at once that is...

Yeah, he didn't LITERALLY march with King. Sure, it may have sounded that way when he said "My father marched with King" but, um, it sure made black people and liberals feel good for a minute, didn't it. Isn't that what's really important?

In a pit full of slimy pieces of shit, Romney would be the slimiest.

Warning

Confirm Action

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Robinson Arms Backs Mitt Romney. Are You Guys Kidding?!! (Page 9 of 35)

Sign up to continue the discussion

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Robinson Arms Backs Mitt Romney. Are You Guys Kidding?!! (Page 9 of 35)