|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
11-14-2006, 08:37 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Having lived in Massachusetts my whole life, I have to say that Romney was the best governor we had. Sorry to see him go. We actually have money in the state "rainy day fund" but I'm sure that will disappear quickly in 2007.
|
|
#2
11-14-2006, 09:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Does he have widespread support in the state?
|
|
#3
11-15-2006, 08:34 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
No he doesn't. Massachusetts is a very blue state. The people voted him in because the state was so in the red because of all the Big Dig fiasco. Romney is a good businessman and had a plan to get us out of the red. He's done it too. Primarily by not approving every little pet project of our legislature. He said he wouldn't raise taxes and he didn't. He also raised certain fees in the state. My kennel license went from $25 a year to $35. No big deal. I've found him to be a man who follows through with his promises. He also cut back on welfare so it was consistant with the other states. I'd vote for him in 2008 but I'm not sure he'd get the nod. He has a tendency to say exactly what he thinks and while I admire that, others don't always.
|
|
#4
11-15-2006, 10:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#5
11-16-2006, 08:30 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Riley, Romney is Mormon, right?
Not that I give two bits about what someone's religion is (my only concern is they keep it out of their governing) but I'm curious if you think that would affect voters' thoughts about him. Re- gun control, Danzig-- I have a friend who has a very interesting theory on gun ownership. Since the right to bear arms is, I believe, connected to the purpose of forming a militia, he was of the opinion that Americans should be permitted access to any weapons the rank-and-file military uses in combat- automatics, semi-automatics, whatever. He was, however, opposed to anyone besides the police owning handguns, since the only purpose of a handgun is to get close enough to someone to shoot them without them seeing you have a gun on you. Though I'm not a fan of his, I really did find Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" interesting-- the middle section of the film looked at why gun violence here in the USA is so much higher than in countries like Canada, where gun ownership is higher, per capita, than here. He focused on the media and the culture of fear it can engender. The movie is uneven (not surprising), but the middle section is pretty thought-provoking. I think it's a difficult issue, because frankly, it's different if you live in a big city than if you do in the 'burbs or the country. Montana's governor is one of the few politicians I've read who actually addresses this fact-- that it's just different depending on where you live. Giuliani was very pro-gun-control while he was mayor here, as is Bloomberg now (both Republicans, by the way). But here, people die from gun violence every week. Every week. People live in close quarters here, they get testy with each other all the time, and it's much easier to kill someone you're mad at from a distance of a few feet than right up against them. A few days ago an innocent man was shot to death in midtown on his way to work by two young men who mistook him for a guy they'd had a scuffle with an hour earlier. Guy left behind a wife and kids. Would these young men have been so quick to kill if they'd had to do it with a knife or with their fists? Would it have slowed them enough to realize they didn't even know this guy? I think one of the problems of our nation is we look so quickly for a one-size-fits-all solution, when most issues don't work that way, because we're such a big country. Though, despite the fear-mongering on behalf of the NRA that liberals want to take away hunting rifles, I have yet to see anything all that reprehensible in limits that have been proposed on gun ownership-- what's wrong with a waiting period before you can buy it? What the heck does anyone need with an assault rifle (my friend's theory notwithstanding)? Can someone explain that to me why those things are wrong? It seems like owning a gun is a big responsibility; what's wrong with making it actually seem like one?
__________________
Gentlemen! We're burning daylight! Riders up! -Bill Murray
|
|
#6
11-16-2006, 07:33 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
To be honest, I don't know Romney's religion. I personally don't follow any religion but I don't ever remember Romney's religion being discussed in Mass..
I do know his wife is a horsewoman. I believe she has MS now and doesn't ride as much. As I said earlier, I really like him but his bluntness could be his downfall. While I don't agree with him on everything, he doesn't back down and you know exactly what you're getting with him. I remember when a group of Katrina victims were relocated here. Romney did background checks on them (the ACLU and our state legislature had a fit about him "violating their civil rights"). His background check revealed several were registered sex offenders (level 2 and 3). He pulled out a little known state law that says background checks are legal if the people are being housed on state property which they were. Shut the ACLU right up. As a mother of a teenage daughter, I backed him all the way. Deb
|
Hybrid Mode
