Well, I guess that's true in a way, if you have reason to believe his current position.
But you're talking about a guy who claims he has been pro-life his entire life, yet tried to run to the left of Ted Kennedy on abortion in 1994.
Throughout his political career, he has consitently changed his views to suit the office he was seeking next.
And that's the problem - we all know what Romney says now that he has sought out the GOP presidential primary vote. The question is, do you believe him? I don't, and for good reason. Namely, his history.
I think Mitt has one principle - his own personal drive for power. All others are expendable. As will be all of the principles in the GOP platform if he is elected president.
I think he would be a somewhat better president than Obama - just about anyone would. But I also think that he would case serious harm to the GOP - far more than Bush's compassionate conservatism ever did. And a Romney presidency would let the GOP-E elements in Congress off the leash.
And I just don't see how Romney wins in November. His only advantage in the GOP primary was money to hammer his opponents into a pulp. He didn't win as much as he destroyed all other alternatives. And he will not have an overwhelming money advantage in November, and he offers no compelling personal reason to vote for him over Obama - the only reason he offers to vote for him is that he is NOT Obama. We have seen that time and time on this thread - we are cajoled to vote for Romney to get rid of Obama. But for independents, you usually also have to give them something to vote FOR, and Romney won't be able to seal that deal.
It is not as linear a debate about Romney versus Obama as the GOP-E would like us to believe. The GOP-E loathes the Tea Party and reformer politicians such as Sarah Palin. They have shown last election that to them, party loyalty only applies when the RINO wins, but we're supposed to suck it up now and rally behind their loser candidate who could only win the nomination by negative advertising his opponents into oblivion. The GOP-E poisoned this well, not conservatives. And now we refuse to drink the Kool-Aid they have made with that poisoned well water. It's that basic.
“Well, I guess that’s true in a way, if you have reason to believe his current position.”
Dirtboy, I have reason to believe his current position because I have seen and heard first hand many others who have made the same change.
Who is anyone here to judge a person’s current character by an initial reaction to an emotional circumstance or situation which causes that person to be upset, especially at a young age?
Worse, who is anyone here that can say they have never been wrong, unenlightened, or had a change of heart regarding an idea or way of thinking?
Attacking a person for changing his mind on a principle, whether running for office or not, always seems a bit odd to me, most especially when the principle pertains to the life issue. I’m not as cynical in this regard as some here are because I have seen it happen. And heard the hell that these people who have changed have gone through. Essentially, politicians are no different than you or I in one way. . . we all make mistakes.
Again. . . Ronald Reagan, Karen Santorum and many many others have seen the light and changed their minds with the help of God’s grace. That is the goal of the Pro-Life movement.
Differing on other policy issues may be a good reason to dislike a candidate. But on this one, please God give those who have come to terms with the reality of the horror of abortion a break. They have enough to reckon with.
“Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.”
Respectfully,
adc