Pot, Kettle...Romney calls Giulani "anti-gun".

[Manedwolf]

Gotta love the hypocrisy, here. Does he really think he's fooling anyone?

ABC News reports that in an interview taped for the Christian talk show 'The 700 Club' set to air March 6, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney smeared contender Rudy Giulani saying, "He is pro-choice, he is pro-gay marriage, and anti-gun. That's a tough combination in a Republican primary."
Advertisement

Because of a 1997 bill that then-mayor of New York City Giuliani signed creating domestic-partnership benefits for homosexual couples, he is often considered 'pro-gay-rights,' writes ABC News. However, Giuliani has never been considered 'pro-gay-marriage.'

Though in 2004, Giuliani told NBC's Meet the Press that he would oppose a federal ban on gay marriage.

"When contacted by ABC News, the Romney campaign was not able to provide substantiation for the governor's claim that Giuliani is 'pro-gay marriage,'" continues the report.

But Mitt Romney has at one time expressed views very similar to each of the things of which he accuses Giuliani.

In a 1994 gubernatorial debate, Romney said, "I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country... I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years that we should sustain and support it. And I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice."

In 2002, Romney told NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts, "I respect and will protect a women's right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government's."

He has since shifted toward a pro-life stance.

Regarding gay marriage, Romney wrote to a group of Massachusetts gay Republicans in 1994, as "we seek to establish full equality for America's gay and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than my opponent [Ted Kennedy]."

In 2002 the Boston Globe reported (via CBN) that then-Governor of Massachusetts Romney would condemn a federal ban on same-sex marriage.

On gun control, OnTheIssues.org reports that Romney supported the assault weapons ban and Brady Bill in 1994. "I don't think (the waiting period) will have a massive effect on crime but I think it will have a positive effect," Romney said at the time.

[Standing Wolf]

Makes me think of Clinton versus Gore.

[Perd Hapley]

Changing one's position is not hypocrisy.  If Giuliani is currently running on an anti-gun platform and Romney is currently running on a pro-gun platform, then Romney is right to point out the difference. 

If he mistook Giulanis position on homosexual marriage as the article states, that would be unfortunate but would not be hypocritical. 

[gunsmith]

Rommney is to the right of Ghengis Kahn compared to Rudy the RINO

[Manedwolf]

Changing one's position is not hypocrisy.  If Giuliani is currently running on an anti-gun platform and Romney is currently running on a pro-gun platform, then Romney is right to point out the difference. 

If he mistook Giulanis position on homosexual marriage as the article states, that would be unfortunate but would not be hypocritical. 

I think it's more that Romney is LYING and pretending he's pro-gun, and would immediately support an AWB. I posted his interview in which he weakly waffled, said he supported Brady and the AWB, and also that his son has a gun in the house the he kinda considered his...kinda.

He's wearing a newly-purchased Reagan hat and thinking it'll fool people, but leftist words keep slipping from his mouth.

[MechAg94]

Why would Ghengis Khan be considered Right Wing? 

[MechAg94]

I heard an interview with Guilliani this morning on a local radio station.  He said all the right things.  On gun control, he made that same statement about what is good for New York is not necessarily good for Texas.  Not sure what that means to him.

I don't know anything about Romney yet.  All these north easterners need to prove they are worthy of our votes IMHO.

[MechAg94]

Changing one's position is not hypocrisy.  If Giuliani is currently running on an anti-gun platform and Romney is currently running on a pro-gun platform, then Romney is right to point out the difference. 

Whether it is hypocrisy or not is not relevant to me.  Past statements do give a window into how the thinks and what he really believes. 

[RocketMan]

On gun control, he made that same statement about what is good for New York is not necessarily good for Texas.  Not sure what that means to him.

It means that, after he has been elected President and jammed more gun control down Texas' collective throat, he will come up with some weasel-worded excuse to justify it.

[Perd Hapley]

Why would Ghengis Khan be considered Right Wing? 

Because he was a big meanie. 


I wish all the politicians I voted for were true believers in every political view that I have.  I'm sure we all wish our candidates were as committed to our political views as we are.  But even if they were, how would we know it? 

When it comes down to it, you can only count on politicians to do and say what they think will get them re-elected.  I'm starting to wonder how much I should be concerned that Romney or Newt or anyone else may not be a true believer.  If the Republican candidate will commit to vetoing a future AWB, that's probably about all we can hope for.  I'm starting to think that all the good candidates are unelectable and all the electable candidates are gun-grabbing, big govt nannies, who will drop the ball on the terrror issue.

If we want to keep our guns and our freedoms, we can only change voter's minds.  Another Reagan (or whatever political hero you choose) is unlikely and won't make that much difference if the Congress thinks the voters want gun bans and universal health care.

[gunsmith]

Why would Ghengis Khan be considered Right Wing?

I'm not sure, I heard it somewhere and liked the way it sounded.

On gun control, he made that same statement about what is good for New York is not necessarily good for Texas.  Not sure what that means to him.

It means he thinks gun owners are really stupid and will vote for him because he has an R in front of his name.
Dean thought the same thing and said the same thing.

Miami is just as dense as NYC and so is Philly.
So what he is saying is you can not trust New Yorkers to ccw and own an AR like you can people from  Miami and Philly, Vegas is pretty dense too come to think about it.

[meinbruder]

Changing one's position is not hypocrisy.  If Giuliani is currently running on an anti-gun platform and Romney is currently running on a pro-gun platform, then Romney is right to point out the difference. 

If he mistook Giulanis position on homosexual marriage as the article states, that would be unfortunate but would not be hypocritical. 

Im reminded of the McGovern run in 72.  He could do the fish flop dance like no candidate Ive ever seen.  I used to raze my best friend at the time about his contradictory statements at least three times a week for the entire campaign.  Changing positions, depending on which audience one is addressing, should be the biggest red flag visible against a candidate for any public office much less the Presidency.

If either candidate is flopping on a position now, why would they be consistent a year from now?  Not to mention after being elected to the office of President?
}:)>

[Perd Hapley]

Changing one's position is not hypocrisy, and it's not flip-flopping, either.  If Romney is singing a different tune from one day to the next, THAT would be flip-flopping.  Show us a timeline of how he's done that, so we can all understand.

People like Al Gore and Dick Gephardt moved from the anti to the pro-abortion camp, and they stayed there.  Why couldn't the same thing happen with guns?

[gunsmith]

I wish Rudy was forced to explain to an interviewer who really knew the gun issue.
That Hannity interview showed that Hannity doesn't understand the gun issue at all.

[Manedwolf]

Changing one's position is not hypocrisy, and it's not flip-flopping, either.  If Romney is singing a different tune from one day to the next, THAT would be flip-flopping.  Show us a timeline of how he's done that, so we can all understand.

People like Al Gore and Dick Gephardt moved from the anti to the pro-abortion camp, and they stayed there.  Why couldn't the same thing happen with guns?

Are you willing to bet the fate of the second amendment on that?

I'm not.

[Perd Hapley]

Maned, I don't want to settle for Romney, either.  And believe me I'm not telling you to trust a politician.     In fact, I'm telling you that you can't even trust the conservatives like Brownback et al.  The fact that they've been on the pro-gun side in the past (as Gore and Gephardt were anti-abortion), doesn't mean they won't have a change of heart later on (as Gore & Gephardt did).  I'm just using those two names as examples of politicians who have betrayed their supporters' expectations.  I'm sure we could come up with some who have betrayed gun-owners, too.  We can't trust the rascals to have their minds right.  We can only trust them to respond to pressure, which is what Romney appears to have done.  He learned, along with the Democrats, that gun control is a loser, so he's trying to stay in our good graces. 

Like I said, I wish our politicians were true believers as we are, but we can't expect that. 

[wmenorr67]

In my opinion Brownback maybe the best option for the 2A, however, the best we could hope for is for him to be the counter-balance and be the VP.