Posted on 05/09/2007 4:47:37 PM PDT by wagglebee
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney says he's getting tired of the questions about his shift a few years ago from supporting to opposing abortion. In a television interview last night, he said he wouldn't be barraged with so many questions if he had switched from pro-life to pro-abortion.
The comments came during a Monday night interview on the Fox News Channel program "Hannity and Colmes."
Romney has frequently explained how he became pro-life a few years ago after having to deal with the issue of embryonic stem cell research as governor -- after campaigning as a pro-abortion candidate on previous occasions.
"What I find interesting is, had I been pro-life and then changed to pro-choice, no one would ask the question," the former Massachusetts governor said.
He added: "But if you go the other direction, as I have and as Ronald Reagan did and (former Illinois Rep.) Henry Hyde and (former president) George Herbert Walker Bush, it's like the media can't get enough of it: 'Oh, well, why did you change?' "
Romney talked about his abortion views during the Republican presidential debate last week.
Asked whether "the day that Roe v. Wade is repealed" would "be a good day for Americans" Romney replied, "Absolutely."
The former governor was also asked about his position change -- something that presumably led to the Fox News comments.
"I've always been personally pro-life, but for me there was a great question about whether or not government should intrude in that decision. And when I ran for office, I said I’d protect the law as it was, which is effectively a pro-choice position," Romney explained.
"About two years ago when we were studying cloning in our state, I said, look, we have gone too far; it’s a brave new world mentality that Roe v. Wade has given us; and I change my mind," he added.
"And I said I was wrong and changed my mind and said I'm pro-life. And I'm proud of that and I won't apologize to anybody for becoming pro-life," he concluded.
Resty, I didn't expect the leader of the Mormon religion to offer anything but WORKS in his compromise to proselytize. You make the point of heresy in Mormonism over and over without realizing it, oddly enough.
>>This just proves to me that Romney DOES NOT understand conservative principles and it gives me real doubts about whether he is really opposed to abortion.<<
I think it says exactly the opposite. What, the guy complains about the media’s treatment of his decision, notes their hypocrisy, and so you practically side with them and doubt him all the same? He’s exactly right. It would be no big deal if he converted to Pro-Choice as far as the media is concerned.
But he becomes Pro-Life, and people love to hate him on this site. It’s a shame. And it really makes no sense. He’s by far the best-qualified candidate in this race. He’s done more to advance conservative principles than anyone out there.
Somehow I have a feeling we’re going to get stuck with Rudy or another compassionate conservative. And watch the budget continue to grow....
Romney 1994 U.S. Senate debate: “I believe that abortion should be SAFE AND LEGAL in this country. I have since the time when 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 that we should SUSTAIN AND SUPPORT it, and I sustain and support that law and the RIGHT of a woman to make that CHOICE.” http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/03/02/romneys_revolving_world/
Romney 2002 gubernatorial campaign website: “On Abortion Rights. As Governor, Mitt Romney would protect the current PRO-CHOICE status quo in Massachusetts. No law would change. The choice to have an abortion is a deeply personal one. Women should be FREE TO CHOOSE based on their own beliefs, not the government’s.” http://web.archive.org/web/20021218005104/www.romneyhealey.com/issues/
Romney 2002 NARAL/Planned Parenthood candidate survey response: “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. The truth is no candidate in the Governor’s race in either party would deny women ABORTION RIGHTS.” http://www.pplm.org/Facts/rf_fact/pr_2005_07_14.htm
“I’ve always been personally pro-life,” Romney says.
To illustrate how vacuous and irrelevant any such claim is, name one politician of either party who’s ever said they’re “personally pro-abortion.”
Hillary and Kennedy say they “personally” oppose abortion.
“To illustrate how vacuous and irrelevant any such claim is, name one politician of either party who’s ever said they’re “personally pro-abortion.”’
You hit the nail on the head. Great point!
Thanks TA.
You got caught with your hand in the cookie jar. Spin it how you want now. The text is there for anyone to read. You did not disclose you were an author until called out on to the carpet by another FReeper. You gave no clue to the dear reader that it was your own /vanity work you posted as news.
>>>I have thoroughly addressed all of these things here more times than I can count.
I'll agree with the "more times you can count" part but thorough? Your posts are highly repetitive.
New tagline just for you...
Funny. The link is back on your own crappy piece you wrote on so-called "Romney Care". For one who posts so "thoroughly", as you claim, under the "View Replies" you are uncharacteristically absent. You never answer. It's like I said in a previous post "Fake but Accurate". At least in Dan's case he finally admitted the documents were forged. You have yet to admit they were forged.
Unmarked Package wrote
EV didn't tell you that the NRA and Gun Owners' Action League (GOAL) endorsed the firearms reform bill in Massachusetts signed by Governor Romney in July, 2004.
The quoted statement at the top of this post from EV's source is a myth specifically denied by the NRA in the bulletin they issued on June 29, 2004. The full contents of the NRA-ILA bulletin endorsing the 2004 legislation is reprinted at the bottom of this post (please pardon the length of the post). 180 posted on 04/14/2007 9:33:06 AM PDT by Unmarked Package (<<<< Click to learn more about the conservative record of Governor Mitt Romney)
Here is a link to the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action
And here is the link that shows your sources are full of falsehoods www.nraila.org//Legislation
You claim to be for Gun rights yet what you are posting is in drect contradiction to the NRA-ILA. Your bias against Roney is blinding you. You have called other deaf and dumb. Might I suggest you start wearing ear protection when you visit the range as something seems to be affecting your own hearing.
Ahh, seeking for power and influence by a sychophantic appeal to a Higher Power.
How about you answer post #369
Your guy signed a permanent assault weapons ban, and said this:
"Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts. These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people."
All of your spinning won't change that.
From your homepage, EV.
When I read posters comments accusing you of holding out to support Alan Keyes for the presidency in this election, I thought, "EV couldn't be that irrational."
I was wrong.
If Alan wanted to be a presidential contender, he would have run serious and effective campaigns to capture a governorship, or a seat in the senate and WON long ago. He failed to do so, and therefore will NEVER be president.
Supporting his candidacy does NOTHING to advance the cause of conservatism. NOTHING. It wastes the money, time and energy of his supporters, makes he and they look like lunatics, and furthermore, because of his association with the conservative movement, so taints the conservative cause.
It is most unfortunate Alan doesn't and didn't in the past, have the humility to continue as a spokesperson for our very fine movement, instead of allowing his ego to get the best of him. He has lost all credibility. By supporting him in this endeavor, AND attempting to destroy serious contenders capable of capturing the presidency, so most unfortunately, have you.
Here's a couple:
A) You support a man on whose watch as Governor of Massachesetts the Left's agenda was advanced further than anywhere else in the country, ever.
B) You support a man that 54% of those polled say they definitely would never support under any circumstances. His negatives exceed those of Hillary Clinton.
Alan Keyes has spent his entire adult life fighting for life and liberty, sometimes at great personal cost. His speeches given a decade or more ago are as timely, and as correct, now as they were then. He has stood like a rock for the things conservatives believe in.
Mitt Romney has spent his entire adult life fighting for legal abortion, the homosexual agenda, the destruction of the Bill of Rights, and the political advancement of Mitt Romney.
But you can’t see the difference? Strange.
He is going to be the next Republican nominee. My track record of picking winners, is better than yours.
BTW, Keyes doesn’t even register on the polls. Odd that your would use polls to attempt to discredit my choice. : )
This isn't a horserace. This is a fight for the survival of our country. It's sad to see someone like you fighting for the liberal side.
His name isn’t in the polls, so it would be hard for him to register, don’t you think?
A simple question for you:
If you had the power, by your one vote, to decide today who was going to be the next President, Mitt Romney or Alan Keyes, which would you choose?
The above counts for a lot. But in the race for the presidency it's meaningless because he can't win. As I said, if Alan truly desired this most illustrious post, the American presidency, he should have run serious and sucessful campaigns for Senate or Governor, the way Mitt and so many of the other candidates have. He failed to do so. He will NEVER be president.
Furthermore, Alan has reached the point (and a while ago) at which he is undermining all the positive influence and progress he made in and for the cause over the years.
I've sacrificed much myself (and so have many people) and in some ways perhaps more. But I wouldn't run for the presidency based upon it.
"Mitt Romney has spent his entire adult life fighting for legal abortion, the homosexual agenda, the destruction of the Bill of Rights, and the political advancement of Mitt Romney."
You have NEVER been able to see, let alone characterize Mitt's governorship in an honest light. Mitt has an extraordinary history of personal and carreer success. He has the Midas touch. Addtionally, his current positions are conservative and he is running on a conservative platform. And here's the sticking point, unlike Alan who doesn't have a prayer, MITT ROMNEY CAN WIN! : )
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.