Posted: 11/20/2006 3:58:24 PM EDT
| pro or anti gun? Thanks |
|
He's Definately a RINO. When he was running for Gov, I was listening to Howie Carr's show when Mit was being interviewed. We were all pleased with what we were hearing. However, a caller told him that he was pleased Mit was running so Mit could help roll back some of th onerous gun laws. Mit replied that he was "perfectily happy" with the [sic]onerous gun laws and wouldn't ever change or challenge them. So, the answer to you your question is , no, Mit could care less about making them less onerous. He joins Rudi J. and the NY Gov and NY Mayor in that area. None of them like guns and will make it their goal to eliminate them. Ugh! I don't know what's worse: a Lib Demoncrat attacking my ability to own guns or the RINO poolicitians not willing to remove the onerous laws! Rome |
MITT Romney's alter ego!  Romney promised "no new taxes" but instead raised fees thru the roof, as he claimed "it would only effect few people"! Gun Licenses went from $25 for 4 years to $100 for 4 years. GOAL succeeded in changing that to 6 years when they couldn't legally (procedure of legislature) roll back the fees to $25. This is for Residents. For NR LTC, it is now $100/year where it used to be $25 (not sure if it was for 1 or 2 years back then). BTW, military personnel is the only exception currently, they can get a 2 year license for that same $100. Romney also required that Constables pay 25% of their gross service receipts to the town/city that appoints us monthly. This was supposed to help the cities and towns!! We are the only profession that gets taxed (25% BEFORE we have to pay income taxes on what remains of our income)! This was buried in ~1100 pages of the budget bill and broadsided us. Yup, Romney would make a great President . . . NOT! |