What does Mitt Romney really believe in? Does he support the sovereignty of We the People of this constitutional republic? On at least a few occasions he has. When asked about abortion, Romney has recently said that he wants individual states to decide for themselves. Despite Romney's floundering on the issue in the past, he has come to the correct and constitutional stance on the issue. Kudos, Mitt. The federal government has strict constitutional duties, and legislating on abortion is not one of them.
But does Romney actually believe that the federal government should generally be held accountable to these restrictions, or only when it's convenient for him?
Here are five examples that I was able to quickly find that show that he definitely will not protect the limitations that we have imposed on our federal government:
He supports ALL of Mass. gun laws
Sure, Massachusetts is not held accountable to the second amendment, but they have some of the most oppressive gun laws around. Romney also says that he supports all of these laws personally. Does Romney think critically enough to not support these same laws on the federal level? It's a scary prospect, at best.
He doesn't believe in a States' authority to enact drug laws
Nowhere in the constitution do We the People grant the federal government the privilege to regulate "drugs". The states have implicit authority in this regard by virtue of the 10th amendment. Now listen carefully to this guy's question:
He didn't ask Mitt for his opinion on marijuana. He didn't ask Mitt whether or not marijuana should be illegal. He asked Mitt what he would do if a state were to exert its sovereignty and to democratically decide that marijuana will not be illegal in said state. Romney clearly shows in his response that he would disregard the state's clear right to do just that. He believes that marijuana should be made illegal in every state of this country. Period.
He would put someone in jail for prescribed medical marijuana use
No, he doesn't say so. Instead, he decides to run away like a kid that just got punched in the face... by a guy in a wheelchair... with muscular dystrophy. By default, this says to me that Romney would indeed put someone in jail for using medical marijuana. If he would not, then why is he not sure enough of himself to say so?
Ron Paul is sure of himself. He tells the same guy that he will never use federal power to put ANYONE in jail for marijuana use. Ron Paul understands his strict constitutional duties as president and is not afraid to declare them:
He wants to federally require VChips in all new computers
There are literally hundreds of existing methods to block pornography on computers. These are cheap and highly available to parents. There is simply no need for the federal government to step in and save the day. Even if this were not the case, there is no federal authority to control private companies in this way.
And yet Romney feels he can legislate his own morals on everyone else:
He supports legally defining Marriage.
You want a definition of marriage? I have one. Marriage is a voluntary contract between people defining whatever relationship responsibilities and privileges they desire. The government is neither a party to this contract, nor do they get to dictate or "define" any of its terms. Romney says that he believes that 1-Man, 1-Woman and one (silent) government together form a marriage and that this definition should be reflected in our laws. Sorry, but We the People have not explicitly given you that authority.
He thinks Obama is Osama
This is #6 of 5. #6 because this one doesn't have to do with the constitution at all, but really shows how blatantly stupid Romney can be.
I mean come on, you can here him say "Osa.." right before he corrects himself and says "Barack Obama" instead .... twice. It's almost as if Romney is concentrating so hard on reciting something rather than actually critically thinking about his statements.
By all means, vote for Romney if you sincerely like him, but have no delusions that he supports your own or your fellow humans' sovereign rights.