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.
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.
“>>>>>I’d say that if Reagan had doubts about abuses then he should have not signed the legislation.”
“Easy for you to say.”
Of course it is easy for us to say. Hindsight is 20/20. Yet we give Reagan a pass for this, and for Sandy Day o’connor, and for not really moving the ball on abortion much, because he was a pro-life leader. GHW Bush was pro-choice in the 1960s and prolife in the 1980s, and his main contribution to the cause was to nominate Clarence Thomas to the USSC. We dont berate GHWBush for being not-pro-life enough, even though he gave us David Souter.
Romney was in office for only 4 years, he doesn’t have a 30 year record on anything. His 4 years as governor show this record to be one of vetoing several bills based on pro-life concerns, supporting abstinence-based education, etc. His real record as governor was not bad.
McCain for overturning Roe v Wade? not in 2000:
“But we all know, and it’s obvious, that if we repeal Roe v. Wade tomorrow, thousands of young American women would be performing illegal and dangerous operations. I want us to be a party of inclusion. I think that we can all be members of the Republican party whether we are pro-choice or pro-life because we share the same goal, and that is the elimination of abortion because it’s an unpleasant and terrible procedure. We think–I think, that we must go back to the party platform of 1980 and ‘84, we include people who have this specific disagreements, who share our same goals.” (Unfortunately, this video is not dated, but given the banner across the screen, it’s from some point during McCain’s 2000 presidential campaign.)”
Rudy Guliani is sticking with a pro-abortion position:
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/may/07051408.html
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-157837611.html
Kate O’Beirne:
“ FOR decades, pro-life activists have been in the business of winning hearts and minds to their cause. Powerful arguments about the humanity of the unborn have moved public opinion, and a pro-life political force has made ambitious politicians feel the heat, whether or not they see the light. Pro-lifers’ faith in the power of persuasion has been rewarded, and their political clout increased, by important converts, including Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Mitt Romney has also changed his position on abortion, but some social conservatives argue that membership in their ranks should be closed to this most recent convert with presidential ambitions.
In 1967, Gov. Ronald Reagan signed a liberal abortion law, declaring, “I’m fully sympathetic with attempts to liberalize the outdated abortion law now on the books in California.” Reagan later changed his mind and expressed regret for signing a measure that saw more abortions performed in California than in any other state before Roe v. Wade. He became a committed pro-life politician and backed the first pro-life plank in the Republican platform. George W. Bush ran as a pro-choice politician in his 1978 congressional campaign, but held pro-life views when he ran for the governorship of Texas in 1994. His father too once favored abortion rights, but took a pro-life position in the 1980 presidential campaign.
When Sam Brownback was running in a GOP congressional primary in 1994, he initially rebuffed a pro-life group’s endorsement, according to a recent account in The New Republic. In that article, a former president of Kansans for Life recalls that Brownback was “unfamiliar with the anti-abortion lexicon” 20 years after Roe v. Wade, and that Brownback described himself as “more in line with the view of Nancy Kassebaum,” the state’s pro-choice junior GOP senator. But Brownback wound up facing a primary challenger who, as the article puts it, “was about as pro-life as you could get without earning yourself a restraining order.” Prior to the race, Brownback had never had to defend his abortion views; but by Primary Day he was on the record as an abortion opponent. The article plausibly asserts that Brownback, who has formed a presidential exploratory committee, “is closing in on a decade as the leading social conservative in the U.S. Senate” (though Rick Santorum also has a claim to that title). “
Conclusion: Every single politician has evolving positions on this. Mitt Romney is not unique at all.