Will They Believe Romney? (After recent revelations, plenty of doubts among conservatives)

National Review ^ | December 18, 2006 | Byron York

[RWR8189]

Some social conservatives in the important primary state of South Carolina are expressing skepticism about Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney after reports of statements from the Massachusetts governor that were pro-choice, in favor of expansive gay rights, and dismissive of Ronald Reagan.

For some, the concern stems not from any single, disqualifying position, but rather a combination of statements from Romney’s political career. “When it becomes a pattern, that’s what causes people to be fearful,” says Oran Smith, head of the pro-life Palmetto Family Council, who has not committed to any candidate in the race. “The Reagan thing, the abortion thing, the gay thing — if you mix all of that together, is there a pattern?”

The first statement to which Smith refers is one that is being e-mailed around Republican circles these days. It is from Romney’s now-famous debate with Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy during the 1994 Senate campaign. In the debate, Kennedy tried to portray Romney as a turn-back-the-clock conservative, and Romney took exception, essentially disavowing Reagan. On October 27, 1994, the Boston Herald reported the exchange this way:

Kennedy attempted to link Romney several times during the debate to conservatives such as Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) and accused him of trying to return the country to the policies of the Reagan-Bush administrations.

Romney objected to the characterizations, saying: “I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.”

Romney has sought throughout the campaign to portray himself as a “Bill Weld Republican” who is liberal on social issues and conservative on fiscal matters.

“You cannot slam Ronald Reagan or disrespect Ronald Reagan in a state like South Carolina,” says Ed McMullen, head of the economically-oriented South Carolina Policy Council. “This man is the true ideological backbone of what Republicans in South Carolina believe.” (Neither the Council nor McMullen has endorsed a candidate for 2008, although McMullen supported Sen. John McCain in 2000.) “Ronald Reagan has an almost deity status,” adds David Woodard, a professor of political science at Clemson who is not aligned with any campaign. “It’s the kind of status, with the core base in South Carolina, where everyone expects to hear a Republican politician say something nice about Reagan.” A number of GOP activists say Romney’s Reagan comments, although they have not received any press coverage, are circulating widely among South Carolina conservatives.

“The governor has said that one of his political heroes is Ronald Reagan,” Romney spokesman Jared Young tells National Review Online. “I don’t know how that squares with what he said in ‘94, but I do know that he greatly respects Ronald Reagan and his vision and leadership for America, and would fancy himself to be a similar type of person.”

On abortion, social conservatives are trying to digest statements made by Romney in 2002, during his successful campaign for Massachusetts governor, and also during the 1994 Senate race. In 2002, Romney wrote, in a questionnaire from the National Abortion Rights Action League, that, “I respect and will protect a woman’s right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government’s.”

Pro-choice activists who interviewed Romney at the time remember an unmistakable commitment to abortion rights. “He was very clear about wanting to make clear that he was pro-choice,” recalls Melissa Kogut, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts. “He clearly was convincing us that he was pro-choice, and he was aggressive about it.”

In 1994, in the same debate with Kennedy that is now receiving new attention, Romney left no doubt about his position on abortion:

I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.

Romney says he changed his mind on abortion in late 2004 after meeting with experts on the issue of stem cell research. “At one point the experts pointed out that embryonic-stem-cell research should not be a moral issue because the embryos were destroyed at 14 days,” Romney told National Review Online last week. “After the meeting I looked over at Beth Myers, my chief of staff, and we both had exactly the same reaction — it just hit us hard just how much the sanctity of life had been cheapened by virtue of the Roe v. Wade mentality. And from that point forward, I said to the people of Massachusetts, ‘I will continue to honor what I pledged to you, but I prefer to call myself pro-life.’”

Romney’s description of his conversion strikes some activists on both sides of the abortion issue as unusual. “People do change their minds,” says the pro-choice Kogut. “I’ve seen it. But this is different. It seems completely timed with his presidential ambitions.” Oran Smith, pro-life, questions Romney’s explanation in a more subtle way. In talks with conservative Christians, Smith points out, Romney has often addressed the issue of his Mormon faith by saying something to the effect of, “Our faiths are different, but they bring us to the same positions on the issues.” But by all accounts, Romney was a faithful Mormon when he was solidly pro-choice, and he is a faithful Mormon today when he is solidly pro-life. How, precisely, did his faith bring him to different positions, then and now? “Christians generally like for someone to have a conversion experience and a mea culpa moment,” says Smith. “But he doesn’t have that to turn to. He can’t say, ‘My faith changed, and therefore my views changed.’ That’s the normal thing with Republicans who move to the right on some issues — they claim to have had some spiritual transformation.”

Another problem Romney might have is the sheer recent-ness of his change of views, which occurred at virtually the same moment Romney was making early moves in South Carolina. A change itself is not that unusual, says David Woodard, but the timing is. “There are a lot of conversion stories,” Woodard says, “people who say, ‘I was pro-choice until my daughter got pregnant,’ or ‘I was pro-choice until a friend got pregnant,’ and then they had a lot of misgivings. That worked in the ‘80s, or the early ‘90s, but in 2004, after this issue has been aired for many years? It’s going to be harder.”

As for gay rights, conservatives have been assessing Romney’s pledge in a 1994 letter to the Log Cabin Republicans, that, “as we seek to establish full equality for America’s gay and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than my opponent,” referring to Kennedy. They are also looking at his support of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) and his stand in 2003 that, although he opposed gay marriage, he would, in the words of a Washington Times report from November of that year, “support a Vermont-style civil union law in Massachusetts.” In addition, Romney’s administration supported a range of gay-friendly policies that are outlined in a long and hostile report on his record, “The Mitt Romney Deception,” by Massachusetts conservative Brian Camenker, that is also circulating among conservatives.

On the other hand, Oran Smith notes that Romney was a source of strong support in the successful drive to amend South Carolina’s constitution to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. “When we were putting on our marriage amendment campaign, he spoke to a luncheon on our behalf and was extremely strong and aggressive in helping us raise funds,” Smith recalls. “I was very impressed with his willingness to help.”

Still, after all the recent revelations, it appears Romney has some serious repair work to do in South Carolina, and among social conservatives in general. Romney has campaigned hard in the state, but he has yet to break into the top tier of candidates. By a number of assessments of public opinion, he stands fourth among possible candidates, behind McCain, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (although that is better than the fifth place Romney was in before outgoing Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist announced he would not run.)

“I don’t think the door has slammed on Romney because of these things,” says Oran Smith. “But people are still sorting it out.”

 — Byron York, NR’s White House correspondent, is the author of the book The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy: The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President — and Why They’ll Try Even Harder Next Time.

[zarf]

Nominate Santorum...he'll sweep into the White House.

How bout Allen, he'll sweep into the White House. /s

[SWAMPSNIPER]

"Just curious...does economic and national security factor into your assessment"?

---

Sure do, after freedom, sanctity of life, and moral fiber.
Just how much will you give up? Do you care that once we've gone too far, there is no coming back, and our grandchildren must live with what we leave? How many generations do you want exposed to "Susie Has Two Mommies"?
We are allowing the liberals to steal our children's birthrights and moral foundation.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Sure do, after freedom, sanctity of life, and moral fiber.

Where does Mitt Romney fail you?

[ZULU]

Not necessarily.

If Hillery Obamma get defeated by a team that thinks like them, they will destroy America too - but then there will be no alternative.

Mitt+McPain+JulieAnnie = LOSERS!!!

[SWAMPSNIPER]

"Where does Mitt Romney fail you"?

---

RKBA, and abortion, at the moment, how does he feel about teaching elementary school kids about Susie's two mommies?

[onedoug]

Santorum 2008

[LdSentinal]

Nope. It's down to McCain and Rudy -- those are the choices.

[The Old Hoosier]

We'll get someone decent -- Sam Brownback, Duncan Hunter, or someone we haven't even heard of yet, like Tim Pawlenty, Jim Gilmore, or Frank Keating.

All seem like longshots now, but the current field is so unimpressive that someone needs to step forward and fill the vacuum. I remember two longshot named Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton running in presidential primaries. How did they do?

[GreatOne]

I'd like to see a lot more attention paid to Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota. He's a conservative who's proved his electability in a blue state . . .

Wrong!!! Gov. Pawlenty is very much pro-sodomite. While he does do some good things (his recent pro-immigration enforcement comments), he is very much a mush when comes to the social issues. The only reason why he survived this year is because his opponent (1) was an unlikable bully (2) whose running mate acted as if she didn't know what ethanol was (3) which resulted in his opponent calling a reporter who asked about the ethanol statement a "Republican whore".

He is a very good public speaker and a good politician - but he's not a solid conservative. There's a very good reason why he's being whispered as McNutcase's running mate.

[Blackirish]

Probably Duncan Hunter

---

He has as much chance as being the next POTUS as George Allen.

[gidget7]

I am looking at his stands on issues, as well as Duncan Hunter, and a couple others.

[gidget7]

Thanks for that info, scratch him from the list.

[Blackirish]

Nope. It's down to McCain and Rudy -- those are the choices.

---

True That.

[SAJ]

Very succinct. Absolutely accurate.

Well said, and a very Merry Christmas to you and yours!

[Torie]

Maybe it is time for a new Freeper poll, given that some Freepers having taken to Duncan Hunter.

If the Presidential GOP primary election were held 
today in your state, for whom would you vote:

Rudy Guiliani
Mitt Romney
John McCain
Duncan Hunter
Other 
Undecided
Would not vote in GOP primary

[KevinDavis]

I know that... When was the last time someone from the House was elected President????

[SAJ]

Fine. Have a nice election.

When you let the LBM define the 'Pubbie candidate, there is utterly no point in voting at all. One gets hard socialism or soft, no third choice.

Good luck to you. You'll need it, I think.

[SAJ]

James Garfield, 1880. Best known for being assassinated.

Easy one (g!).

[KevinDavis]

I hear the term Social Conservative, I have feeling you want someone to have Government go into our bedrooms????