And They Call It Progress
By Vin Suprynowicz
Article appeared in Shotgun News
Vol 61 – Issue 29, October 10, 2007 – Newsstand Oct 22, 2007
They say former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is currently leading the field among
Republican presidential contenders here in the “early caucus” state of Nevada. So this is what
the party of Robert A. Taft and Barry Goldwater has come to.
The year before he landed his one-term governorship, Romney, a gun-grabbing socialist, ran the
2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, which turned into a handy excuse to install a tax
subsidized boondoggle light rail system, even though it had been rejected by local voters nine
years before. He and his gang then refused to allow Utah residents who had jumped through
every (unconstitutional) hoop to acquire a concealed-weapon permit to show up armed at this big
United Nations Winter Games, since that might “frighten the foreigners”.
(“When the Olympic Salt Lake Organizing Committee refused to relent, the state took the
unprecedented step of assuming liability if concealed-weapons permit holders were hurt at the
2002 Winter Games – and could prove that their gun would have protected them,” the Christian
Science Monitor reported – www.csmonitor.com/2004/0510/p03s01-usju.html.)
And here I thought the “idea of America” was to demonstrate the advantages of freedom through
example. If they didn‟t want to be surrounded by armed and free people, why didn‟t the
Europeans stage their little ski meet in Sverdlovsk?
As governor of Massachusetts, Romney supervised a commonwealth where state-funded
billboards declare “Have a gun, go to jail.” As a result, the murder rate in Boston keeps climbing.
The answer of Romney and his gang? Tougher victim disarmament laws, of course. In his 2002
race, Romney lauded those Draconian laws during a debate against Democrat Shannon O‟Brien.
“We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them,” he said. “I won’t chip
away at them. I believe they protect us and provided for our safety.”
What‟s his plan to protect our guys in Baghdad? Take away their rifles and issue them really big
whistles?
As governor, Romney in 2004 signed his own state ban on ugly-looking semi-automatic rifles to
replace the federal version (which was allowed to expire since it had accomplished nothing, just
th
as we predicted.) He thus violated both the Second and 14 amendments – the latter enacted to
stop racist governors from enforcing so-called “black codes that make it harder for Americans of
African descent to arm themselves for self-defense, as is now the case in Massachusetts.
Despite his reputation for flip-flopping on this issue as on others, Romney told the American
Spectator this year “My position is the same as it has been which is I support the Second
Amendment, but I also support (an) assault weapon ban, that‟s why I signed a bill of that
nature.”
Romney, who apparently owns no firearms despite claiming earlier this year that he did, joined
the NRA last year and has claimed to be a hunter, but backed off that story when asked where he
has ever had a hunting license and whose gun he used to go hunting.
www/editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003568720)
Romney, who oversaw a $5.2 billion (23%) increase in state spending during his four
years, also signed into law the closest thing to state-run socialized medicine yet seen in
this country.
“Romney‟s socialized medicine law mandates everyone who doesn‟t have insurance to buy it – or
suffer income tax penalties,” reports Massachusetts Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Carla
Howell at www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/howell5.html.
“Romney‟s mandate will cost individual taxpayers many thousands of dollars every year in health
insurance premiums for unwanted policies – or force them to pay the equivalent in tax penalties,”
Ms. Howell explains.
Some will argue this isn‟t communism, since the insurance companies are still privately owned –
through heavily regulated by the state, which drives up costs by mandating all kinds of bizarre
coverages. If you insist, I will relent: This does indeed more closely match the dictionary
definition of “fascism.”
“The total cost of RomneyCare in mandates and new spending? At least several billion dollars
every year - to start,” Ms. Howell continues. “It will rise from there, as socialized medicine
programs are wont to do. Romney‟s law goes into effect in 2009. Unless it‟s repealed before
then, the loudest screams of protest from Massachusetts won‟t be heard until after the 2008
presidential election is over. Romney‟s time-release tax increase.”
Mill Hillary, eat your heart out.
Finally getting around to visiting Nevada late in August, the former governor told 60 supporters in
a hotel conference room that he‟d be tough on illegal immigration, but then immediately added
that he wouldn‟t, you know, actually deport anyone.
After all, Romney whimpered, “You certainly can‟t round up 12 million people, put them on buses
and deport them.”
Why not? In the year 2000, there were 48 million school-age children in America. Every school
day, more then half of them are bused to school. That‟s a carrying capacity of more than 24
million people. Those buses sit unused for two months every summer. Even if each bus trip took
a week, followed by a week off for vehicle maintenance, it seems to me we could deport about 96
million people in a single summer, using idle school buses alone.
Yes, Congress would have to divert some money to pay drivers and guards – that‟s what you get
when you neglect your duty for years on end. But Mr. Romney didn‟t say, “It would be costly.”
He said it can‟t be done.
Or did he mean that he has o idea how to find them?
Stood in line at the post office recently?
Then it was time for Mr. Romney to spout his carefully programmed double-talk on the planned
national nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
“I can tell you that I would make sure that in no circumstances would we ever do anything that
would put the well being or the health of Nevadans at risk,” Romney said, as former Nevada Gov.
Kenny Guinn stood next to him, nodding like a bobblehead. “This is a matter which is being
currently studied and reviewed.” Mr. Romney then said, channeling the late Sen. Everett Dirksen,
who commonly used the same construction, word for word, when he wanted to make it sound like
he was answering a question he really wasn‟t.
“We‟ll want to see what the results of that review are.”
Oh, please.
As my small contribution to seeing our visiting politicians spout a better class of fibs, here‟s a
Yucca Mountain position that actually makes sense, which any of them is welcome to use, free of
charge:
“This is the place where I‟m supposed to keep my options open by saying we‟re going to „wait for
the scientific studies on Yucca Mountain to come in,‟ right? Give me a break:
“1) We need nuclear power – a lot more nuclear power – to keep our economy growing and to get
your power bills down, It‟s the cheapest, safest, cleanest source of power we have and most of
the cost to date has been because of excessive regulation driven by lawsuit-filing zealots in
Brikenstocks who‟d like to see you peasants out here in Flyover Country back plowing behind a
mule.
“2) It would have been better if the nuclear industry had been left to negotiate its own waste
storage agreements by private contract without federal meddling, but we‟re up to our hips in it
now, so the federal government has a role in deciding where that waste goes.
“3) We can leave it in the cooling pools at the existing reactor sites, which have fairly good
security, or we can ship it all the way across the country and pile it up here in Nevada. I believe it
makes more sense to leave it where it is. Under no circumstances should we ever bury it, since
there‟s still a lot of valuable energy in those spent fuel rods. Within a century or so we‟re going to
have far safer and more effective technology to reprocess that fuel, so why on earth would we
want it entombed where we can‟t get at it?
“4) That‟s why I‟d ask Congress to pull the plug on Yucca Mountain immediately. If Congress still
wants a central storage site, above-ground, they should announce how much they‟re going to pay
the residents of any state that votes to accept the stuff, the same way we pay folks up in Alaska
to accept the risks of their oil pipeline.
“5) Actually, I bet Congress wouldn‟t have to spend a cent. If you want states competing to see
who can get a waste site, all Congress has to do is make this offer: Let any state that‟s interested
hold a vote in November of 2009. The state that OKs the deal by the highest margin will get the
waste site. And Congress won‟t pay the residents of that state a single cent. All we‟ll do is send
everyone who was a resident of record of that state on that election day a formal letter, notifying
them they don‟t have to file or pay a single penny of any current or future federal income tax, for
the rest of their natural lives. Problem solved; Amen.”
Vin Supynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal and author of
the novel The Black Arrow. See
www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?kn=suprynowicz&vci=51238921.