Skip to comments.Romney’s Record on Judicial and Legal Appointments: Can he be trusted to appoint conservatives? 2011
Posted on 04/25/2012 8:32:10 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
Summary: Mitt Romneys record as Governor does not indicate a commitment to a conservative judicial philosophy.
His judge appointees revealed at best no philosophical or partisan pattern (Boston Globe), or at worst a liberal and even radical tilt. He sought out feminists and radical homosexual groups in his judicial selection process. He was inconsistent in his pronouncements on judicial activism, allowing it to occur under his watch (with gay marriage) while simultaneously urging others to fight it. How then could we expect him to keep his recent promises to appoint constitutional conservatives to the bench if he is elected President? . . . . . The Boston GLBT newspaper Bay Windows happily catalogued Romneys gay appointees, knowing that they would use their offices to promote their causes. Their sexual orientation was not just a private matter, as Romney would have us believe, but carried a political agenda. The lead attorney for gay marriage in Massachusetts explained, As feminists in the 1970s rightly noted, and other civil rights and social justice movements found out, the personal is political, or at least it can become so.  Yet as Governor, Romney chose to ignore this obvious fact.
Romney appointed at least two homosexual activist judges, and even bragged about it:
Ive appointed approximately 60 judges, one or two of whom... one of whom Im quite confident is gay, the other may be gay as well. I think he probably is, and there may be more for all I know. But Ive never asked a judicial candidate, are you gay? and discriminated against them on that basis. Nor, if I look in their resume and theres an indication of their being gay,
(Excerpt) Read more at amycontrada.com ...
Of course he can’t be trusted!
To the headline: no he can not, and it doesn’t matter anymore because he has been crowned the winner.
“To the headline: no he can not, and it doesnt matter anymore because he has been crowned the winner.”
There’s still work to do. We have to be sure anyone but Mitt wins the election. ANYONE.
Possibly manipulated into it.
“Don’t feed the Obama troll.”
It appears your logic is somewhat clouded.
You post several articles a day critical of Romney.
Romney will be the nominee.
If you don’t want Romney... what’s left?
You, coming from a blue state, in the midst of all those liberals, I have to wonder, maybe YOU are the Obama troll? The left often accuses the opposition of doing exactly what they, themselves are trying to do. (Tip of the hat to Jim Quinn).
“Sorry, but all anyone has to do is look at your posting record and your posts about supporting Obama to see that you are the Obama troll.”
If anyone applies logic, and looks at what you’re posting, I think you win the troll award.
I would bet someone very close to Mitt Romney (ie, immediate family) is gay. His sympathies are too intense for it to be a matter of abstract belief.
Romney will appoint the very same candidates that Obama would appoint. It’s already proven by his past appointments.
This cheetah (should be pronounced Cheater) will not be changing his spots if elected so if anyone is thinking he will they should buy a bridge I have for sale in Brooklyn.
Can i get in on this?You are the troll,
No, you are the troll,
No, both of you are the troll.
You were a troll before troll was invented.
You are such a troll, trolls are afraid to cross your bridge.
Obama sucks, but Mittens sucks worse.
He is the sucker of suckdom, complete suckee, or would that be sucker?
This is fun!
“This is fun!”
That makes you the troll of all trolls. You are to trolls what Adam was to humanity.
As for who Romney will appoint when he is no longer constrained by the vagaries of the Massachusetts judicial appointment system, which required the approval of an all-Democratic committee to be effective, we can't know for sure. He didn't have the chance to appoint any justices to the Massachusetts Supreme Court, and ideology tends to matter less for lower court appointments.
So the bottom line is that we can't be certain that Romney will appoint conservatives, but we do know that Obama will appoint liberals. Seems there's only one way to go if you're a betting man.
You get the government you deserve."
But you advocate ensuring that anyone but Mitt wins the election. That means (in practical terms) you advocate Obama win, since there are only two realistic choices at this point.
It appears you want all of us to have the government you deserve.
As for me, I do see a difference between Romney (who will be have to at least listen to conservatives, but probably will have to act conservative) and Obama (who will have no practical limits if re-elected). See my tag line.
“As for me, I do see a difference between Romney (who will be have to at least listen to conservatives, but probably will have to act conservative) and Obama (who will have no practical limits if re-elected). See my tag line.”
The official FR party line is anyone but Mitt. Don’t vote Obama, don’t vote Romney. Write in Palin.
I assume if enough of us do that Obama will win, and the GOPe will be taught a lesson!
Openly supporting Romney is strongly discouraged here.
“4. What’s left is voting your conservative principles (with you I think they are probably more like suggestions than principles) and voting for either a third-party actual conservative in the POTUS position or writing in and finding acceptable CONSERVATIVE republicans in down-ticket races.”
Ah ha! There you have it. Take people who would normally vote Republican, and encourage them to vote for someone who will not win, thus negating their vote. The result?!
You sir, are an Obama troll.
Has a ring to it.
Hey, gotta go to work, will look in later.
Are you telling us that when Captain Incompetent and Brain-Dead-Biden tell us that Romney is a “...hard-right zealot...”, they are LYING?
And that when they say that Romney “...would BAN birth-control...”, they are LYING?
I think you are being much too “subtle” when you make those points.
Instead, why don’t you report that, in a “just” world, every step our Liar-in-Chief takes would leave a tread-mark on his Pinocchio-like nose?
BTW, did you hear that the dog-eater has hired 500 or so morons to troll conservative websites from a phone-bank in Chicago? Their “mission” is to try to stir up trouble among the dog-eater’s enemies by sowing misinformation about the Republican candidates.
It’s interesting to me that those morons know — first hand — that their paymaster is dishonest. They must be really greedy. OK. OK. They could be really stupid.
Hey, gotta go to work, will look in later.”
Wow... I bow to your excellence.
You are the high FOAKT indeed!
My mission is, per wishes of many at this site, to insure Mitt loses in his failing quest to be crowned king.
After all, having obama as the resident in chief for another 4 years, jetting round the world on my dime, spewing EO's right and left, er, left and left, and generally flipping the bird to the US of A would certainly be an improvement over getting that Filthy Romney anywhere near the WH.
Being FOAKT is quite a chore sometimes, but somebody has to do it.
“My mission is, per wishes of many at this site, to insure Mitt loses in his failing quest to be crowned king.
After all, having obama as the resident in chief for another 4 years, jetting round the world on my dime, spewing EO’s right and left, er, left and left, and generally flipping the bird to the US of A would certainly be an improvement over getting that Filthy Romney anywhere near the WH.
Being FOAKT is quite a chore sometimes, but somebody has to do it.”
Given that I have already capitulated, and acknowledged you as FOAKT, your decrees work well with me. In fact, I must now admit openly to being a FOAKT-bot.
However, you will have a tougher sell with rouge trolls, such as SoConPubbie. While he is not nearly as accomplished in the dark arts of trolling, he is determined.
Discovering trolls, of any stripe, or hue, really is not difficult, to anyone with a couple of spare neurons to rub together to create heat.
Again, Romney would only slow down the descent, but he would slow it down. Obama in a second term will wipe out so much freedom that we will not ever get it back in any of our lifetimes.
Simple choice. It took us 80 years to get from FDR to here, if we have Obama for another 4, it will be at least 80 until this country rights itself (if ever).
Romney pretty much has won the nomination, under the existing rules. There is no realistic third choice. See my tag line.
Yes, lets just ban anyone who vocally supports voting for the Republican nominee. That way, we can get the site down to tens of people who can just sit around agreeing with each other that its not their fault.
You forgot the word Mormon. Use Mormon somewhere. Preferably as an insult.
It’s better than having supporters of that Marxist yankee around. If you support Romney, you support Marxism.
Are you saying that your hatred of Romney is so strong, that you will actively help re-elect the dog-eater?
Yes, everyone one but me is a Marxist, because calling things Marxist means we dont have anymore discussion. Newt was a Marxist after all. Believing in man made global warming, promoting liberal Republicans in the House, and calling Paul Ryan’s budget “right wing engineering.” Lets get rid of anyone who is a “Marxist” so five people can agree with each other about how vindicated they feel.
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.