Romney's Website and Positions on Issues [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Romney's Website and Positions on Issues


beforeobamabans
06-21-2012, 03:50
http://www.mittromney.com/

As a Romney sceptic, I have been spending a lot of time researching his positions. If one can assume his written positions are a true reflection of his beliefs and therefore his intent upon being elected, his excellent website puts forth the image of a "traditional conservative".

If you hit the 'Issues' drop down menu, you'll find expansive summaries of his positions on numerous hot buttons. While occasionally short on specifics, Romney does commit to some clear goals that at least take us in better (i.e., more conservative) directions.

For example, on spending, he commits to reducing spending as a percentage of GDP to <20% vs the current estimated 24.5%. While not nearly enough for me, I recognize that we have to start somewhere.

On Social Security (an issue near and dear to me), Romney claims that he will protect current and imminent retirees and return the system to solvency with two simple changes: gradual raising of the retirement age and means testing for recipients.

On foreign policy, Romney clearly follows the neo-conservative philosophy of America as the world's policeman. While this will please many on this board, I think he's going to have a hard time getting to his stated spending goals while growing the defense budget and taking a modest approach toward social security and Medicare.

I could go on but, I post this to give GTPI a reference point for Romney positions so that hopefully, future discussions of such can accurately reflect where the man actually stands on the issues rather that the heresay we so often see thrown around.

One thing is perfectly clear:

Romney does present a vital contrast to Obama across the entire spectrum of issues. No one can honestly claim that there's no difference between the candidates. So, I would encourage all to do some of your own primary research instead of just rehashing some one else's article or opinion.

Good reading...

Bren
06-21-2012, 04:06
Romney only has 1 position - he is pro-Romney. He does whatever gets him votes. In Mass. he acted like a yankee, as required to get the job. However, that is exactly what makes him the right choice, when the alternative in Obama.

beforeobamabans
06-21-2012, 04:52
I am much more interested in what he will do as president than what he did as governor of Mass. I do not think it illegitimate to tailor one's positions and policies to the small specific electorate of a single state that has different priorities than the nation as a whole and then modify them for the larger different national audience. The important thing is that he does what he says he will do and while there is no way to guarantee this, we can at least be conversant on his written positions during this campaign so that we can hold him accountable if he's elected.

Cavalry Doc
06-21-2012, 06:47
As the Supreme Court recently reaffirmed, the Second Amendment protects one of the American people’s most basic and fundamental individual rights: “the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.” The Second Amendment is essential to the functioning of our free society. Mitt strongly supports the right of all law-abiding Americans to exercise their constitutionally protected right to own firearms and to use them for lawful purposes, including hunting, recreational shooting, self-defense, and the protection of family and property.

Like the majority of Americans, Mitt does not believe that the United States needs additional laws that restrict the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. He believes in the safe and responsible ownership and use of firearms and the right to lawfully manufacture and sell firearms and ammunition. He also recognizes the extraordinary number of jobs and other economic benefits that are produced by hunting, recreational shooting, and the firearms and ammunition industry, not the least of which is to fund wildlife and habitat conservation.

Mitt will enforce the laws already on the books and punish, to the fullest extent of the law, criminals who misuse firearms to commit crimes. But he does not support adding more laws and regulations that do nothing more than burden law-abiding citizens while being ignored by criminals. Mitt will also provide law enforcement with the proper and effective resources they need to deter, apprehend, and punish criminals.

As governor of Massachusetts, Mitt was proud to support legislation that expanded the rights of gun owners. He worked hard to advance the ability of law-abiding citizens to purchase and own firearms, while opposing liberal desires to create bureaucracy intended to burden gun owners and sportsmen. As governor, he also designated May 7th as “The Right to Bear Arms Day” in Massachusetts to honor law-abiding citizens and their right to “use firearms in defense of their families, persons, and property for all lawful purposes, including common defense.”

As president, Mitt will work to expand and enhance access and opportunities for Americans to hunt, shoot, and protect their families, homes and property, and he will fight the battle on all fronts to protect and promote the Second Amendment.


Yup, better than Barry.

Midwestern "bitter clingers" frustrated over broken promises. (Aug 2009)
Opposed bill okaying illegal gun use in home invasions. (Aug 2008)
Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)
FactCheck: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban. (Apr 2008)
April 2008: "Bittergate" labeled Obama elitist. (Apr 2008)
Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)
Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)
Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007)
Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)
Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004)
Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)
Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)

Acujeff
06-21-2012, 19:55
Courts and The Constitution
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/courts-constitution

Mitt Romney’s view of the Constitution is straightforward: its words have meaning. The founding generation adopted a written constitution for a reason. They intended to limit the powers of government according to enduring principles. The job of the judge is to enforce the Constitution’s restraints on government and, where the Constitution does not speak, to leave the governance of the nation to elected representatives.

At times over the past hundred years, some justices of the Supreme Court did not carry out that duty. There were occasions when the Supreme Court declined to enforce the restrictions on power the Framers had so carefully enumerated. At other points, the Court created entirely new constitutional rights out of “penumbras” and “emanations” of the Constitution, abandoning serious analysis of the Constitution’s text, structure, and history.

Mitt believes in the rule of law, and he understands that the next president will make nominations that will shape the Supreme Court and the whole of the judiciary for decades to come. He will therefore appoint wise, experienced, and restrained judges who will take seriously their oath to discharge their duties impartially in accordance with the Constitution and laws — not their own personal policy preferences.

As president, Mitt will nominate judges in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito. These justices hold dear what the great Chief Justice John Marshall called “the basis on which the whole American fabric has been erected”: a written Constitution, with real and determinate meaning. The judges that Mitt nominates will exhibit a genuine appreciation for the text, structure, and history of our Constitution and interpret the Constitution and the laws as they are written. And his nominees will possess a demonstrated record of adherence to these core principles.

beforeobamabans
06-22-2012, 04:53
Courts and The Constitution
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/courts-constitution

As president, Mitt will nominate judges in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito.

Again, a stark difference between Romney and Obama.

Mitt's obviously playing to the choir here. Can we trust him to do what he says?

And while SCOTUS appointments are always important, we have so many critical issues on this country's plate that this particular issue is not pre-eminent.

FFR Spyder GT
06-22-2012, 08:51
Mitt's obviously playing to the choir here. Can we trust him to do what he says?



Nope.

He's a politician.

He will say whatever he feel he needs to say to get elected.

Go to his website and under "issues" read through them and then look at his record.

Pretty simple.

He says one thing but did something totally different as Gov'r of Mass.

Plus since he was born with a Sliver Spoon up his rectum he cannot know what the middle-class is going through.

Ask him the same question they asked Big George, "How much does a loaf of bread and a gallon of milk cost?" and he would be clueless. Not that Obama would know either.

Cavalry Doc
06-22-2012, 09:48
Again, a stark difference between Romney and Obama.

Mitt's obviously playing to the choir here. Can we trust him to do what he says?

And while SCOTUS appointments are always important, we have so many critical issues on this country's plate that this particular issue is not pre-eminent.

If the choice is between Barry or Mittens, I'll take the guy that is at least saying he's leaning my way over the guy that is saying he is leaning in the opposite direction. There are, of course no guarantees, but there are only a few ways to vote/not vote. None of the choices is perfect, so each if should go the way we want to go, and see where the chips fall.

jeanderson
06-22-2012, 10:50
You know what? I don't really care! HE'S NOT A MARXIST.

I'd vote for Charlie Sheen over Obama.

maxsnafu
06-22-2012, 11:15
Yup, better than Barry.

"Better than (fill in the blank)" is going to be the GOP's epitaph.

Bren
06-22-2012, 11:24
Nope.

He's a politician.

He will say whatever he feel he needs to say to get elected.


That's exactly why you can trust him. He is running as a Republican and he has to spend his first term making Republicans happy to get a second term. Obama, on the other hand, will never again need to ask anybody to vote for him for any thing - how do you think that's going to work out?

That Romney does whatever it takes to please the voters is exactly why he looks so liberal in Mass. (where a conservative won't get elected) and why he's the right choice. He is a self-serving professsional politician. As much as he can, Romeny is going to try to do whatever pleases the most of his supporters.

Cavalry Doc
06-22-2012, 11:30
"Better than (fill in the blank)" is going to be the GOP's epitaph.

Sure whatever.

The way to fix the nomination process is through the primaries. The current order which allows the little blue states to go first seems to be the best way to nominate the most liberal candidate for each party.

Guss
06-22-2012, 12:36
The Romney web site ... Check back regularly for updates.

maxsnafu
06-22-2012, 21:11
Sure whatever.

The way to fix the nomination process is through the primaries.

What do you think the odds are of that happening given how well the current system works for the GOP elites?

GAFinch
06-22-2012, 21:52
In his book, Romney is very clear about looking at the fiscal solvency of programs over multiple decades instead of just the standard one decade that other politicians rely on. He's very clear about the inefficiency of federally-run programs and wants to move them to states, private companies, and/or charities which can all run them more efficiently. Even if programs aren't completely eliminated RP-style, just getting them to a balanced budget level will lead to a noticeable shrinking of big government. While this will be done more gradually than what RP suggested, it ensures short term and long term stability, which is good for business, which means increased tax revenues, increased business expansions, and increased job hirings. Even if Romney is focused on the budget, remember that adding on new gun control, medical programs, welfare programs, environmental programs, etc all mean larger government and larger budgets.

Bonus news:
Along with 236 members of the House, Romney has just signed Norquist's Taxpayer Protection Pledge which ensures that no tax loopholes are removed without an equal amount of tax rate reductions. Unilateral removal of tax loopholes has, of course, proven to lead to the extra revenue being used toward more spending later on, despite Democrat promises to the contrary (ie 1982). This expands on the previous no new taxes pledge signed by Republicans, which they have been good about following. Without the ability to raise taxes, Republicans aren't going to be able to increase spending with the $16 trillion deficit. With both Romney and a majority of the House on board with the expanded pledge, they should keep each other in check.

countrygun
06-22-2012, 22:35
And while SCOTUS appointments are always important, we have so many critical issues on this country's plate that this particular issue is not pre-eminent.

A Presidents SCOTUS nominations may have far further reaching consequence for the 2nd Amendment that teh President direct actions.


Besides that, Romney also has an advantage in that he has realized the benefits of, and has experienced success in the private sector. This is something that Obama is a complete stranger to.

kirgi08
06-23-2012, 02:14
Nope.

He's a politician.

He will say whatever he feel he needs to say to get elected.

Go to his website and under "issues" read through them and then look at his record.

Pretty simple.

He says one thing but did something totally different as Gov'r of Mass.

Plus since he was born with a Sliver Spoon up his rectum he cannot know what the middle-class is going through.

Ask him the same question they asked Big George, "How much does a loaf of bread and a gallon of milk cost?" and he would be clueless. Not that Obama would know either.

Sorta like my cats,they produce rabbits for me ta eat.Obama just dines on the socialists diet.No work = free food.Ure payin the bill.You good with that?.'08.

Cavalry Doc
06-23-2012, 05:11
What do you think the odds are of that happening given how well the current system works for the GOP elites?

I see more chaos than control here again. The states kept moving their primaries up, to increase their own importance. Self interests and hubris (more common In libs) from multiple competing interests started the cascade of events that led to the current system.

What is needed is control, and a conservative RNC chairperson.
Don't know if it will happen, but it's not impossible if the issue is raised to the level of public consciousness.

Cavalry Doc
06-23-2012, 05:12
The Romney web site ... Check back regularly for updates.

:rofl: That's funny right there.

countrygun
06-23-2012, 09:18
Nope.

He's a politician.

He will say whatever he feel he needs to say to get elected.

Go to his website and under "issues" read through them and then look at his record.

Pretty simple.

He says one thing but did something totally different as Gov'r of Mass.

Plus since he was born with a Sliver Spoon up his rectum he cannot know what the middle-class is going through.

Ask him the same question they asked Big George, "How much does a loaf of bread and a gallon of milk cost?" and he would be clueless. Not that Obama would know either.


Oh let's try to divide America into classes shall we?
We tend not to elect grocery clerks or plumbers as President, never figured out why????
At least Romney has worked in the private sector unlike Obama who was born with an affirmative action race card up his keister.

thetoastmaster
06-23-2012, 09:33
The Romney web site ... Check back regularly for updates.

A video about the two Mitt Romneys:

Still Voting For 'Mitt Romney'? - YouTube

I don't think he thinks before he speaks.