Asking Mitt - An interview with Governor Romney

National Review Online ^ | September 19, 2007 | Stephen Spruiell

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

It’s only Wednesday, but already it’s been a busy week for former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who is, of course, currently running for the Republican nomination for president. Since Monday, he held a press conference denouncing Hillary Clinton’s much-discussed national health-care plan, wrote a letter urging U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to bar Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from addressing the U.N., and unveiled a 68-page policy document titled, “Strategy for a Stronger America.” On Tuesday, Romney spoke with National Review Online about his week so far.

--snip--

Romney sounded more certain when the discussion moved to Iran. I asked him about his letter to Ban Ki-moon, requesting that the newly-elected secretary-general revoke Ahmadinejad’s invitation to address the U.N. General Assembly next week. Wouldn’t it have made more sense to ask the U.S. State Department simply to deny Ahmadinejad a visa?

“The invitation was extended by the secretary-general, and that’s the first place where, in my view, the invitation should be withdrawn,” Romney says. He repeated another point he made in his letter to Ban Ki-moon, which is that Ahmadinejad should be indicted for inciting genocide against the people of Israel.

--snip--

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>I’d say that if Reagan had doubts about abuses then he should have not signed the legislation.

Easy for you to say. One sentence or one paragraph doesn't change the factual content. Frankly, this is another attempt to revise the historic record as it relates to Reagan, in an effort to give Romney a pass on his 30+ year pro-abortion record. Won't work.

I'd be willing to post more facts, but something tells me you're not interested in the truth.

[Reagan Man]

Most of us conservatives are willing to give Romney credit for turning his back on Roe v Wade and abortion on demand. We just don’t believe his conversion to pro-life status was done out of honest convictions. Rather, we believe he changed his politics on abortion because he decided to run for the GOP nomination. Something he won’t win, btw.

[redgirlinabluestate]

Reagardless of whether YOU believe him or not, people who are leaders in the pro-life movement like Jay Sekulow, James Bopp, Jr., Wendy Long, Peter Flaherty, DO believe him. And Mitt has committed to supporting a ban on abortion once Roe v. Wade is overturned. That's something Fred Thompson has failed to do.
http://www.evangelicalsformitt.org/front_page/romney_thompson_differ_on_stat.php

Wendy Long(former law clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas):

"Our country faces a new generation of challenges, which has presented our courts with a new generation of legal issues. As Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney witnessed firsthand the impact our courts can have when facing these new challenges. I believe that he, better than any other candidate for President, understands the need for our courts to respect democracy and the will of the people. I believe that he, better than any other candidate for President, would nominate judges and justices of the highest caliber, who would be faithful to the text, history, and principles of our Constitution. I look forward to working with the Governor."

[trisham]

That is such an incredibly dishonorable proposition, there is no way I can respond to it, nor is there any further need.

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

:)

[Reagan Man]

Mitt Romney has been pro-abortion for most of his life. On the abortion issue, Romney has little credibility. He is no conservative and lying about Reagan pro-life credentials doesn't help Mitt Boy either.

Fact. Fred has been a conservative his entire life. With a 100% pro-life voting record in the Senate.

LATE-TERM ABORTION BAN. Passage of the bill to impose penalties on doctors who perform certain late-term abortions, in which the person performing the abortion partially delivers the fetus before performing the abortion. Approved 54-44, December 7, 1995. Fred supported the bill.

PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION. HR 1833 (CQ Senate Vote 301), Partial Birth Abortion Ban Veto Over-Ride. Passage, over President Clinton’s April 10 veto, of the bill banning a late-term abortion procedure, where the physician partially delivers the fetus before completing the abortion. An exception would be granted when the procedure is necessary to save the life of the mother, provided no other medical procedure can be used. Rejected 57-41 (a two-thirds majority of those present and voting – 66 in this case – is required to override a veto), Sept. 26, 1996. Fred supported the legislation.

PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION BAN. HR1122 (roll call vote 71). Passage of the bill to impose penalties on doctors who perform certain abortion procedures, in which the person performing the abortion partially delivers the fetus before completing the abortion. An exception would be granted where the procedure was necessary to save the life of the mother. The bill was amended to allow an accused doctor a hearing before a state medical board prior to trial. Passed 64-36, May 20, 1997. Fred supported the bill.

HYDE AMENDMENT. S947, FY 1998 Budget Reconciliation (roll call vote 129). Kerrey (D-NB) amendment to strike the "Hyde Amendment" prohibiting the use of federal funds for abortions except in cases of rape or incest, or when pregnancy threatens a woman's life. Rejected 39-61, June 25, 1997. Fred opposed the Kerrey amendment.

[redgirlinabluestate]

No, Romney was not pro-abortion, he was effectively pro-choice before becoming pro-life, just like many of your other heroes. That is not the same thing as being pro-abortion and seeking expansion of abortion rights etc....

---->>> Mitt Romney never took any pro-active steps to aid the pro-abortion agenda, like lobbying or lawyering for a pro-abortion group, for instance. And, every action Romney took while governor was in support of life.

Governor Romney was presented with legislation concerning life issues on several occasions from the 85% majority Democrat Legislature in Massachusetts. In every instance he took the pro-life position by vetoing bills or lobbying for the pro-life approach, including the following actions:

--- He vetoed the bill providing state funding for human embryonic stem cell research (Theo Emery, "Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney Vetoes Stem Cell Bill," The Associated Press, 5/27/05)

--- He vetoed a bill that provided for the "morning after pill" without a prescription because it is an abortifacient and would have been available to minors without parental notification and consent (Governor Mitt Romney, Op-Ed, "Why I Vetoed The Contraception Bill," The Boston Globe, 7/26/05)

--- He vetoed legislation which would have redefined Massachusetts longstanding definition of the beginning of human life from fertilization to implantation (Governor Mitt Romney, Letter To The Massachusetts State Senate And House Of Representatives, 5/12/05)

--- He supported parental notification laws and opposed efforts to weaken parental involvement (John McElhenny, "O'Brien And Romney Spar In Last Debate Before Election," The Associated Press, 10/29/02)

--- He fought to promote abstinence education in public school classrooms with a program offered by faith-based Boston group Healthy Futures to middle school students. Gov. Romney's administration was the first in Massachusetts to use federal abstinence education funds for classroom programs. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, Romney Announces Award of Abstinence Education Contract, April 20, 2006)

--- Governor Romney: "Times of decision are moments of great clarity. Before I was Governor, the life issue was just that, an issue. But when responsibility for life or ending life was placed in my hands, I made the right decision. I chose life." (Governor Mitt Romney's Remarks At The National Right To Life Convention Forum, June 15, 2007)

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>No, Romney was not pro-abortion, he was effectively pro-choice before becoming pro-life, just like many of your other heroes. That is not the same thing as being pro-abortion and seeking expansion of abortion rights etc....

Sorry. You don't get to make the rules.

Pro-choice and pro-abortion are one in the same. John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton are all examples of pro-choice politicos, AKA. pro-abortion. They also support Roe v Wade. The fact you want to redefine what abortion means, clearly shows your willingness to substitute truth for falsehoods.

"I RESPECT and will protect a woman's right to choose. . . . Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government's."
~~~ Mitt Romney to NARAL, April 2002

"[A]s Governor of the Commonwealth, I will protect the right of a woman to choose under the law of the country and the laws of the Commonwealth."
~~~ Gov Mitt Romney, 2002

Romney In 2002 NARAL Questionnaire: "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."

"On A Questionnaire Planned Parenthood Gave To The Gubernatorial Candidates In 2002, Romney Answered `Yes' To The Question, `Do You Support The Substance Of The Supreme Court Decision In Roe V. Wade?'"

Romney During 1994 Debate: "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 US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it."

[Quicksilver]

Easy for you to say. ...

I believe that was the essence of what I said.

... Frankly, this is another attempt to revise the historic record as it relates to Reagan, in an effort to give Romney a pass on his 30+ year pro-abortion record.

I disagree. I'm not revising anything and I'm aware of Romney's record.

I'd be willing to post more facts, ...

I have read them many times, plus I have done my own research.

... but something tells me you're not interested in the truth.

I'm comfortable with the truth as it stands.

[Quicksilver]

Most of us conservatives are willing to give Romney credit for turning his back on Roe v Wade and abortion on demand. We just don’t believe his conversion to pro-life status was done out of honest convictions. Rather, we believe he changed his politics on abortion because he decided to run for the GOP nomination. ...

You speak for most conservatives? :)

... Something he won’t win, btw.

You may be right, but I think he has an excellent chance. I will support whoever the GOP nominee is. Will you do the same?

[Quicksilver]

Well, we agree on the Indians. :)

[redgirlinabluestate]

I don't see it as the same thing at all. Many here went nuts over the difference between "effectively" pro-choice and "adamantly" pro-choice. Obviously, there ARE different levels of support for or against abortion. Some may see it as murder, some may see it as none of their business and others may see it as a right worth fighting for and actively participate in preserving or expanding that right.

Oh no, we are going back to the outdated quote duel? And then maybe the dueling youtube clips next? I think we've gone past that already, don't you? But one good outdated quote, deserves another....

--- "Government should stay out of it... The ultimate decision must be made by the women... Government should treat its citizens as adults capable of making moral decisions on their own." -- Fred Thompson, July 1994

---During an interview with the Conservative Spectator, a Tennessee newspaper, he claimed to be pro-life but also said that, “The ultimate decision on abortion should be left with the woman and not the government.” http://www.macsmind.com/wordpress/2007/06/17/the-choppin-down-of-the-tree-called-fred-thompson-begins/

---U.S. Sen. Fred Thompson says he seldom hears about abortion in campaign travels throughout Tennessee and hopes the issue is downplayed at the Republican National Convention... He said the party must avoid distracting issues and focus on electing Bob Dole as president. 'We need to concentrate on what brings us together and not what divides us,' Thompson said in an interview with The Tennessean published Tuesday.
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/192754.aspx

Romney never lobbied or lawyered for a pro-abortion group.

Romney has a letter of support from pro-life groups thanking him for all the hard work he's done -- actual actions taken just in the last few years -- in support of the pro-life cause. The other candidates should post their letters.P>---------------

An Open Letter from Pro-Life Leaders Regarding Governor Mitt Romney

January 11, 2007

Dear conservative friends:

We hail from a broad spectrum of organizations dedicated to fighting for the pro-family agenda in Massachusetts. As you know, Mitt Romney became the governor of our state in 2003.

Since that time, we have worked closely with him and his excellent staff on that agenda. Some press accounts and bloggers have described Governor Romney in terms we neither have observed nor can we accept. To the contrary, we, who have been fighting here for the values you also hold, are indebted to him and his responsive staff in demonstrating solid social conservative credentials by undertaking the following actions here in Massachusetts:

• Staunchly defended traditional marriage. Governor Romney immediately and strongly condemned the 2003 court decision that legalized “same-sex marriage” in our state. More importantly, he followed up on that denunciation with action – action that saved our nation from a constitutional crisis over the definition of marriage. He and his staff identified and enforced a little-known 1913 law that allowed them to order local clerks not to issue marriage licenses to out-of-state couples. Absent this action, homosexual couples would surely have flooded into Massachusetts from other states to get “married” and then demanded that their home states recognize the “marriages,” putting the nation only one court decision away from nationalizing “same-sex marriage.”

• Worked hard to overturn “same-sex marriage” in the Commonwealth with considerable progress to date. In 2004 he lobbied hard, before a very hostile legislature, for a constitutional amendment protecting marriage – an amendment later changed by the legislature to include civil unions, which the Governor and many marriage amendment supporters opposed. Working with the Governor, we were successful in defeating this amendment.

• Provided active support for a successful citizen petition drive in 2005 to advance a clean constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

• Rallied thousands of citizens to focus public and media attention on the failure of legislators, through repeated delays, to perform their constitutional obligation and vote on the marriage amendment.

• Filed suit before the Supreme Judicial Court. The Governor’s suit asked the court to clarify the legislators’ duty to vote and failing that, to place the amendment on the 2008 ballot. That lawsuit, perhaps more than any other single action, was by all accounts instrumental in bringing pressure on the legislators to vote. The vote ultimately was taken on January 2, 2007 and won legislative support – clearing a major hurdle in the three year effort to restore traditional marriage in the Commonwealth.

• Fought for abstinence education. In 2006, under Governor Romney’s leadership, Massachusetts’ public schools began to offer a classroom program on abstinence from the faith-based Boston group Healthy Futures to middle school students. Promoting the program, Governor Romney stated, “I’ve never had anyone complain to me that their kids are not learning enough about sex in school. However, a number of people have asked me why it is that we do not speak more about abstinence as a safe and preventative health practice.”

• Affirmed the culture of life. Governor Romney has vetoed bills to provide access to the socalled “morning-after pill,” which is an abortifacient, as well as a bill providing for expansive, embryo-destroying stem cell research. He vetoed the latter bill in 2005 because he could not “in good conscience allow this bill to become law.”

• Stood for religious freedom. Last year, Governor Romney was stalwart in defense of the right of Catholic Charities of Boston to refuse to allow homosexual couples to adopt children in its care. Catholic Charities was loudly accused of “discrimination,” but Governor Romney correctly pointed out that it is unjust to force a religious agency to violate the tenets of its faith in order to placate a special-interest group.

• Filed “An Act Protecting Religious Freedom” in the Massachusetts legislature to save Catholic Charities of Boston and other religious groups from being forced to violate their moral principles or stop doing important charitable work.

All of this may explain why John J. Miller, the national political reporter of National Review, has written that “a good case can be made that Romney has fought harder for social conservatives than any other governor in America, and it is difficult to imagine his doing so in a more daunting political environment.”

We are aware of the 1994 comments of Senate candidate Romney, which have been the subject of much recent discussion. While they are, taken by themselves, obviously worrisome to social conservatives including ourselves, they do not dovetail with the actions of Governor Romney from 2003 until now – and those actions have positively and demonstrably impacted the social climate of Massachusetts.

Since well before 2003, we have been laboring in the trenches of Massachusetts, fighting for the family values you and we share. It is difficult work indeed – not for the faint of heart. In this challenging environment, Governor Romney has proven that he shares our values, as well as our determination to protect them.

For four years, Governor Romney has been right there beside us, providing leadership on key issues – whether it was politically expedient to do so or not. He has stood on principle, and we have benefited greatly from having him with us. It is clear that Governor Romney has learned much since 1994 – to the benefit of our movement and our Commonwealth. In fact, the entire nation has benefited from his socially conservative, pro-family actions in office. As we explained earlier, his leadership on the marriage issue helped prevent our nation from being plunged into even worse legal turmoil following the court decision that forced “gay marriage” upon our Commonwealth.

For that our country ought to be thankful. We certainly are.

Sincerely,

Rita Covelle President, Morality in Media Massachusetts

Richard Guerriero Immediate Past State Deputy, Massachusetts State Council, Knights of Columbus

Mary Ann Glendon Learned Hand Professor of Law, Harvard Law School

Kristian Mineau President, Massachusetts Family Institute

Dr. Roberto Miranda President, COPAHNI Fellowship of Hispanic Pastors of New England

James Morgan President, Institute for Family Development

Joseph Reilly President, Massachusetts Citizens for Life

Thomas A. Shields Chairman, Coalition for Family and Marriage

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>I believe that was the essence of what I said.

I didn't see it that way. You're remarks were nuanced rhetoric. ;^)

>>>>>>I'm not revising anything and I'm aware of Romney's record.

Really. You gave your opinion and agreed with Romney that Reagan was adamantly pro-choice. When there is no evidence to support such an assertion. Obviously you view Romney`s record through the prism of anti-conservative politics. If you didn't you would have dropped the "Romney is like Reagan" nonsense by now.

>>>>>I have read them many times, plus I have done my own research. I'm comfortable with the truth as it stands.

You're an historic revisionist with no respect for the truth. If you did your own research, you wouldn't be backing Mitt Boy. His shifts on abortion, gays and guns, along with his penchant for nationalized health care make him a very poor candidate for conservatives to support.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>You speak for most conservatives? :)

I consider FRee Republic to be a bedrock conservative political forum. Most FReepers don't support Romney. My home county/town is also a bedrock conservative community. Outside of a few Mormons, I don't know any conservative that is considering voting for Romney in the GOP state primary. A few uncommitted conservative voters were shocked to hear about Romney's lifelong support for Roe v Wade and abortion on demand. Not to mention his shifts on guns and gays.

>>>>>>You may be right, but I think he has an excellent chance. I will support whoever the GOP nominee is. Will you do the same?

I officially ruled out voting for any liberal a long time ago. Decades ago. In my book, Giuliani is low life scum. Since Mitt will not be the nominee, that is a hypothetical not worthy of a serious comment at this time.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>Oh no, we are going back to the outdated quote duel? And then maybe the dueling youtube clips next? I think we've gone past that already, don't you? But one good outdated quote, deserves another....

Outdated? Far from it. Fact. Fred has been a life long conservative. As far as I can tell, Fred has always been pro-life, while calling the abortion issue a states rights issue. Not an issue for the federal govt. Until we cosnervatives can get a Constitutional amendment passed into law outlawing most abortions, ending Roe v Wade as the policy of the US govt is the best alternative we pro-lifers can hope for.

Romney is a recent convert to a pro-life position. It appears to many of us, that Romney's change of heart is nothing but more political expediency to advance his personal agenda in politics. It leaves his integrity open to many questions. You can continue giving Romney a complete pass on his 30+ years of support for Roe v Wade and abortion on demand. This conservative will not.

More of Fred`s 100% pro-life Senate voting record.

ABORTIONS IN OVERSEAS MILITARY HOSPITALS. S2057 (roll call vote 176). Murray (D-WA) amendment to repeal current law prohibiting overseas U.S. military hospitals and medical facilities from performing privately funded abortions for U.S. service members and their dependents. Rejected 44-49, June 25, 1998. Fred opposed the amendment.

PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION. HR1122 (roll call vote 277). Passage, over President Clinton's October 10, 1997, veto, of the bill to ban a certain late-term abortion procedure, in which the physician partially delivers the fetus before completing the abortion. Rejected 64-36, September 18, 1998. A two-thirds majority of those present and voting (67 in this case) of both houses is required to override a veto. Fred supported the legislation.

TRANSPORTING MINORS FOR ABORTION. S1645 (roll call vote 282). Motion to invoke cloture (thus limiting debate) on the substitute amendment to the bill that would make it a federal crime for anyone other than a parent to transport a minor across state lines with the intent to obtain an abortion. Motion rejected 54-45, September 22, 1998. Three-fifths of the total Senate (60) is required to invoke cloture. Fred supported the cloture motion.

Prohibit Drugs to Induce Abortion, HR 1906 (Roll Call Vote No. 173). June 8, 1999 - Coburn (R-OK) amendment to prohibit the use of any funding for the Food and Drug Administration to test, develop, or approve any drugs for the chemical inducement of abortion. Amendment adopted 217-214, 8 June 1999. Fred supported the amendment.

[Quicksilver]

>>>>>I believe that was the essence of what I said.

I didn't see it that way. You're remarks were nuanced rhetoric. ;^)

Easy for you to say. ;)

>>>>>>I'm not revising anything and I'm aware of Romney's record.

Really. You gave your opinion and agreed with Romney that Reagan was adamantly pro-choice.

My opinion was on the merits of Reagan's decision to sign the legislation -- nothing to do with Romney there. And, no, I did not say that I agreed with Romney with regard to Reagan being adamantly pro-choice.

>>>>>I have read them many times, plus I have done my own research. I'm comfortable with the truth as it stands.

You're an historic revisionist with no respect for the truth. ...

As I told EV once, we obviously interpret facts differently, which is okay. :)

[Reagan Man]

>>>>My opinion was on the merits of Reagan's decision to sign the legislation -- nothing to do with Romney there. And, no, I did not say that I agreed with Romney with regard to Reagan being adamantly pro-choice.

The inference you gave with your remarks is crystal clear. You make excuses for Mitt Boy and don't care who you step on in the process. Pathetic.

>>>>>As I told EV once, we obviously interpret facts differently, which is okay. :)

My guess is, EV didn't agree with you either. As the saying goes. You're entitled to your own opinion. Just not your own facts.

[Quicksilver]

>>>>>You speak for most conservatives? :)

I consider FRee Republic to be a bedrock conservative political forum. Most FReepers don't support Romney. My home county/town is also a bedrock conservative community. Outside of a few Mormons, I don't know any conservative that is considering voting for Romney in the GOP state primary. ...

Okay, most conservatives that you know then.

... A few uncommitted conservative voters were shocked to hear about Romney's lifelong support for Roe v Wade and abortion on demand. Not to mention his shifts on guns and gays.

I'm sure they were given the inaccuracy of what they were told.

>>>>>>You may be right, but I think he has an excellent chance. I will support whoever the GOP nominee is. Will you do the same?

I officially ruled out voting for any liberal a long time ago. Decades ago. In my book, Giuliani is low life scum. Since Mitt will not be the nominee, that is a hypothetical not worthy of a serious comment at this time.

IOW, you reserve the right to revise and extend your remarks. ;)

[Petronski]

Oh no, we are going back to the outdated quote duel?

It's got nothing to do with outdated quotes. It's all about Slick Willard's fresh lie.

[Reagan Man]

I see. You’re a smartaleck, but you’re no conservative.

You’ve proven that, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

[curiosity]

Romney is without a doubt the hardest working and most efficient of all the candidates.

Indeed, but I am starting to think he's working a bit too hard. Whenever I've seen him do a live appearance lately, he's looked really tired. He was definitely not at his sharpest during the last debate.