Posted on 01/29/2008 1:41:19 PM PST by AFA-Michigan
NEWS RELEASE
A new 527 group called RoeGone.org -- the conservative answer to MoveOn.org -- has produced a 60-second web ad responding to Gov. Mitt Romney's challenge to look to his record as governor as an indication of where he stands on the issues.
TV AD -- Romney: "Look at my record as governor"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peFGA_HN3Yc&feature=PlayList&p=FD9F88028457D175&index=0
"Governor Mitt Romney challenged voters to look at his record. RoeGone.org has done just that," said spokesperson Sharon Blakeney, a lawyer in Boerne, Texas.
Blakeney said the group is raising money to place the ad on television in Super Tuesday states later this week. The group also plans to produce ads addressing other politicians' stand on similar issues, she said.
RoeGone.org is a pro-life organization committed to the appointment of judges who will support overturning Roe v. Wade.
---
Full script of ad:
In the Florida debate, Governor Mitt Romney said:
"I can point to a very simple way to find out exactly where I stand, and that is look at my record as governor."
Really?
As governor, Mitt Romney issued an executive order forcing justices of the peace to perform homosexual weddings, or resign. Then he ordered marriage licenses changed to read “party A” and “party B” -- instead of “husband” and “wife.”
As governor, Romney appointed a board member of the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association to the bench, and appointed more Democrat judges than Republicans.
As governor, Romney authored and signed a mandatory heath insurance plan backed by Ted Kennedy -- including taxpayer-funded abortion on demand.
As governor, Romney overruled his own health department and forced Catholic hospitals to distribute the morning after abortion pill.
Homosexual marriage? Tax-funded abortions? Catholic hospital morning after pills? Homosexual activist judges?
"Look at my record as governor."
It was either McCain or the Huckster. Since Huckabee’s an afterthought at this point, and the Romney attack ad came on the heels of a decisive race that Huckabee isn’t a factor in, I guessed McCain. Sue me.
David French, who posted a commentary on Evangelicals for Mitt saying that so-called homosexual “marriage” was already legal in all 50 states — both factually and legally false — and who had to be pressured/ordered by his colleagues at the Alliance Defense Fund, after I brought it to their attention, before he would remove that legally erroneous information (which forever thereafter made me question the objectivity or soundness of his legal/political reasoning).
That said, though I obviously strongly disagree with his views on the prez race, I deeply respect and salute David for his service to our country in Iraq and pray that he will return safely from that fight to this fight, and that his wife and family will be both comforted and kept safe during his absence.
Not gonna sue you, Whistling.
Just amazed at the assertions of alleged fact that get posted here that have no basis in fact.
“It’s a McCain front group.”
“It’s funded by George Soros.”
“Mitt Romney is pro-life (and always has been).”
That sort of thing.
I agree. I am really comforted by the cream of the crop people who have come forward for Mitt. Just truly good Americans, decent people, who want what’s best for the country and their kids. They are not blinded by any religious bias or some sort of one-issue absolutist rage.
Not really, all it takes is a 1/2 second google, here's just a few from the first page.
Dr. John Wilke, founder of the modern pro-life movement. Sen Jim Demint one of the best pro-life advocates in the Senate James Bopp Jr. another leader in the pro-life movement. Paul Weyrich etc. that's just the first few entries of google. You should try it sometime.(But I am guessing you already know Romney has pro-life support but are just interested in distorting that fact and wasting my time)
In other news Pat Robertson endorsed abortionist Guliani and the Southern Baptist Convention presidents, National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) endorsed Thomspson. Which is intersting because while they support a Human Life Amendment while Thompson does not.
I'll trust John Wilke over Robertson on this one.
However, governors cannot simply ignore rulings they do not like. If they could, it would be the end of the Rule of Law in this country. What would be the point of having a judicial branch if the executive could just defy their rulings? What would be the check on executive power?
Hence Romney, though he disagreed with the ruling, did not defy it. Instead, fought it through legitimate, legal means, i.e. by trying to pass a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as between a man and woman. That's why he continues to fight for a Federal Marriage amendment.
Likewise, Lincoln never defied or ignored the Dred Scott decision. That decision was only overturned by the 13th Amendment.
Ram, nice try.
Now try again.
As I’m sure you read the first time and conveniently chose to try to pull a fast one, I said list all the pro-life ORGANIZATIONS who’ve endorsed Mitt. There are plenty of individuals whose support Romney has been able to buy.
I mean, literally, people who endorse him, then you find out later they were paid.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
So let's see. You post an article that touts a new anti-Romney 527 and you list a link to their site. But when you hit the link it doesn't take you to an official site with a link to the youtube video but makes a switcharoo to youtube.com directly. That is there is no site but a trojan link. Even if you type in the url you still get the same result.
I know, I know, "can you refute the charges made?" Well when people did on this thread you just ignore their point and respin your point again and again. Let's just say that there is no possible retort because you would never accept any other so in essense this is a complete exercise in futility.
Amazing that he played for the FR Inaugural Ball. What a shift.
“Governors cannot simply ignore rulings they do not like. If they could, it would be the end of the Rule of Law in this country. What would be the point of having a judicial branch if the executive could just defy their rulings? What would be the check on executive power?”
Who says it would be the end of the rule of law?
Lincoln said if a court’s decision is the final word, then the people are no longer governing themselves. And the writer I cited quoted Lincoln to that effect. So what were Lincoln and the person who quoted him saying, we have no choice but to stand by while the American people lose their constitutional right to govern themselves?
I don’t think so.
Trying to deny or cover up the documentable proof of Romney’s record is indeed “a complete exercise in futility.”
Why? He’s not the BEST pro-life candidate, and NRTL already endorsed Thompson and won’t endorse again.
I never made the claim that the decision did nothing. It’s clear what the decision orders.
Did the court decision order Romney to enact homosexual marriage by executive action?
That was the original question.
That's not what Lincoln said. I defy you a single passage where he advocates defying a court ruling.
ME: “Lincoln said if a court’s decision is the final word, then the people are no longer governing themselves.”
YOU: “That’s not what Lincoln said.”
From my original post, quoting an as yet unnamed individual quoting Lincoln:
“Here is what Lincoln said: ‘If the policy of the government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.’”
Now what I said Lincoln said, is exactly what he said. I just said it in two lines rather than eight.
Now, whose veracity are you questioning:
Mine?
Lincoln’s?
Or the guy I quoted who was quoting Lincoln?
Lincoln is saying the court shouldn't legislate from the bench. Romney said the same thing.
And besides, there are legal ways of the people to overrule a court: pass a constitutional amendment.
He is not saying that the executive can simply ignore the court when he does not agree with a decision.
Again, I defy you to find a single instance where he makes such a statement.
The court ruled the state could not deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.