Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Bob J
>>>>>Isn’t that what I said?

Yes, but you also threw in a cheap pot shot at Reagan that serves no good purpose. And you know it! Again, Reagan didn't allow anything. The "opening" you speak of was taken by the liberal health care providers who just happened to also be the power brokers who ran the medical business in California.

Romney's epiphany on the abortion issue came in the same time frame he made the decision to run for potus. Obviously, a political metamorphosis based more on political expediency than conservative principle.

The fact that Romney continually has flipped on many issues over the years, should be a major factor in not supporting him for any elected position. Just look at the videos in my reply at post #127. If Romney wanted the support of pro-life conservatives, he should had his epiphany 10-15 years ago, not on the eve of his presidential run. Romney remains a first class phony.

252 posted on 12/02/2009 11:18:43 AM PST by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies ]


To: Reagan Man
If Romney wanted the support of pro-life conservatives, he should had his epiphany 10-15 years ago, not on the eve of his presidential run.

**********************

Exactly right. The timing was propitious, was it not?

263 posted on 12/02/2009 11:24:12 AM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies ]

To: Reagan Man
“Romney’s epiphany on the abortion issue came in the same time frame he made the decision to run for potus. Obviously, a political metamorphosis based more on political expediency than conservative principle.”

I don’t rule that out but isn’t that what the torches and pitchfork crowd here demand and what the Tea Partyeers have been saying?

“CAN YOU HEAR US NOW!”

The premise of people who demand their pols listen to them and bend to the will of the people is that politicians should and must modify previous positions if in fact that is the desire of the people they are supposed to represent.

Then the next day they demand the representatives they support have “unbending principles”. Unbending means unchanging.

You can’t have it both ways. Demanding pols have unbending principles then demanding they change their positions to reflect the mobs positions is a contradiction.

285 posted on 12/02/2009 11:39:52 AM PST by Bob J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson