I will be posting some links detailing Mighty Mitt's ACTUAL record on abortion below. Needless to say, it's quite different from the anti-abortion crusader you seem to be trying to portray him as, which means your opinion of Mitt is based on either ignorance or dishonesty. That makes you a shill.
I have not been silent about Romney's record. I guess, by the definition you're using for being "silent" about it, you've also been silent as you've failed to back up your assertions that Romney's record is pro-abortion. You simply give nebulous statements saying that he's not trustworthy on the abortion issue while saying that his actual record is the most important determining factor.
Fine, let's talk about Mitt's record on abortion.
Human Events Magazine in 2005 listed Mitt #8 among the Top Ten RINO's in the country, they note that he was quoted as saying, "I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country". His support for strict gun control and "civil unions" for gays was also noted.
There's also a whole gaggle of revealing quotes from various Massachusetts newspapers about Romney's positions on abortion, and social/moral issues in general. Among these quotes, we have:
Mitt's record on abortion is that he was pro-choice until he realised, around the middle of 2005, that being pro-choice would hurt his chances of winning the GOP nomination.
I've falsely portrayed nothing. Are you implying that Dr. Jack Willke is also falsely portraying Romney's record? Is Dr. Willke a "shill" now because he disagrees with your assessment of Romney's record? This man has dedicated his life to the pro-life cause and is now staking his invaluable reputation on Romney yet you're going to disregard it and call Dr. Willke a "shill!!?"
Since Dr. Willke appears to be either ignorant of or deliberately obfuscating Mitt's pro-choice record, then yes, Dr. Willke is a shill for Romney (though it should be noted that Dr. Willke's choice was apparently made because he suffers from UFOH (Unfounded Fear of Hillary) Syndrome.
For one, your link here in this thread does not point to what you think it points to. Second, some of the links in the post where you think that you disproved something are expired and don't point to anything. But, most importantly, you were wrong in that post (which I did find through a little searching) because Roll Call #369, to which I was referring, WAS another vote on keeping FEHB funds from paying for abortions. It was a Committee vote to strip lines 10-17 from page 76 of the legislation, which would have removed that language allowing payment for abortion services. If you would actually read the Congressional Record on the matter you would see that. Your claims that you disproved anything are what is verifiably false.
The only dead link in my previous post was the one that was supposed to go to the THOMAS list of amendments to H.R.2020 provided with the bill. Apparently THOMAS doesn't like such links, and allows them to expire. One can easily go to either of the other links (the two pro-life votes by FDT) and click on the bill number itself, then click on "Amendments" and see the list for themselves. The amendment you describe doesn't even APPEAR on that list, however. In fact, I've searched the Congressional Record and cannot find the language nor lines which you describe. Can you kindly provide a link to the text which contains the page and line numbers for verification (since the bill text, either HTML or PDF, seems to be unpaginated)?
And I was NEVER asserting that Fred Thompson was anything other than a pro-life candidate.
That's good, because unlike with Mitt, such an assertion would be blatantly false.
What I've been asserting and will continue to assert is that he doesn't have a 100%, perfect pro-life in the Senate. People here want to demand that he does, but they're wrong.
I don't demand that, and in fact, I would be highly surprised if he actually did have a 100% pro-life record from 1994-2001. Why? Because FDT does indeed appear to have gradually changed his position on this issue towards the pro-life side (as have MILLIONS OF OTHER AMERICANS, btw). The difference between FDT and Romney is that FDT seems to have changed his position over a number of years, while he was already elected and thus didn't have an "uh oh" reason for evolving on this issue. Mitt, on the other hand, appears to have suddenly (mid-2005) realised that he'd better get with the program if he wants to get nominated as the GOP presidential candidate. The former is a reasonable process of development, the latter is a crass political manueovre.
I back up my assertions with the solid facts that the premiere pro-life organization in America - the National Right to Life Committee - did NOT give him a 100% rating
Which is because they grade on other issues besides just abortion and "life issues". If you look at the actual NRTL scorecards for 1997-1998, 1999-2000, and 2001-2002, we see that each session, the only things they dinged FDT on was his campaign finance "reform" votes (which, admittedly, were very bad decisions). As far as actual, real, true-to-life abortion votes, he is 100%, per the votes they listed each session.
AND I did find one amendment on which he did not vote the pro-life position. Instead he voted with all but 5 of the Democrats and a bunch of RINOs like Jeffords, Spector, etc. There may be others, but I'm sure that it is an extremely rare occurrence.
I have yet to see that you've actually "found" anything here. And even if you did, as you pointed out, it is an "extremely rare occurrence", which manifestly CANNOT be said for Mitt Romney, at least prior to the middle of 2005.
Continuing to demand that Thompson has a perfect, 100% pro-life record - despite seeing the facts that he doesn't - meets your own definition of being a "shill".
I don't "demand" anything. I am extremely unconvinced that he doesn't have such, but I don't DEMAND that he have one. For reasons that have been previously discussed on threads on FR, there are any number of good reasons why a person might vote procedurally for a bad amendment - it's often a way of manipulating the timing of a vote so that a bad bill will be killed or an amendment stopped before it has sufficient momentum to pass. Such votes, even if made for a good procedural purpose, will still "look" bad on a scorecard.
Does Mitt Romney have a 100% pro-life record? No. Does Fred Thompson? No. Did Mitt Romney answer some pro-choice groups' questionnaires in a manner which did not assert a pro-life position? Yes. Did Fred Thompson do the same? Yes. Neither candidate is perfect on the issue. That's all I've been trying to claim, your false claims, aspersions and namecalling notwithstanding.
You are comparing apples with oranges. Mitt's public record, up until mid-2005, seems stridently pro-choice, and then he makes a sudden about face. It's not just that he "doesn't have a 100% pro-life voting record" or that he answered some questionnaire questions pro-choice. The point is that he CONSISTENTLY was pro-choice, until quite recently, and his about face appears to be politically motivated by the necessities of Republican primary politics. This cannot be truthfully said of FDT.
Wasn't it you that said that a person's actual record is the paramount qualifier? But now you've quoted a bunch of things that Mitt Romney has SAID, not his actual record of governance - as it specifically relates to abortion - as Governor of Massachusetts. And even now you promised to reveal Mitt's actual record, yet all you could produce were cherry-picked quotes he may have made one time or another.
Let's look at some of his actual record on Abortion and other information regarding his stance on the issue:
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 researchGovernor 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."
(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 Mitt Romney's Remarks At The National Right To Life Convention Forum, June 15, 2007)Eight prominent leaders of pro-life and pro-family groups in Massachusetts wrote an open letter praising Gov. Romney for his leadership and accomplishments in these important issues and attesting to his commitment to the pro-life and pro-family causes. (This letter is a MUST READ)
Massachusetts Citizens for Life recently gave Gov. Romney their 2007 Mullins Award for Outstanding Political Leadership presented at the Mother's Day Pioneer Valley Dinner where Romney delivered the keynote speech.
Ann Romney serves as co-chairman of the Massachusetts Citizens for Life capital campaign.
Massachusetts Citizens For Life Executive Director Marie Sturgis: "Having Governor Romney in the corner office for the last four years has been one of the strongest assets the pro-life movement has had in Massachusetts."
(Kathryn Jean Lopez, "An Early Massachusetts Primary," National Review, 1/10/07)Massachusetts Citizens For Life Pioneer Valley Chapter Chairman Kevin Jourdain: "Mitt Romney was a great Governor, who served with honor and distinction. But most importantly, he was a pro-life Governor. He vetoed a number of pro-abortion pieces of legislation and made many pro-life appointments. He was always there for us."
(Kevin Jourdain, Remarks, Agawam, MA, 5/10/07)Governor Romney has received the important endorsement of James Bopp, Jr., a nationally-known attorney and leading advocate for the pro-life movement. Jim Bopp reviewed Romney's record as Governor and questioned him personally before giving Romney his endorsement. Bopp most recently joined the Romney Presidential campaign as a special adviser on life issues, an unpaid position.
Bopp wrote about the record of Gov. Romney,
"These actions as governor have lead leaders of the most important social conservative groups in Massachusetts, including Massachusetts Citizens for Life, Massachusetts Family Institute, and the Knights of Columbus, to observe that, while previous comments by Romney “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 positively and demonstrably impacted the social climate of Massachusetts.” They conclude that Romney “demonstrat[ed] [his] solid social conservative credentials by undertaking” these actions, and has therefore “proven that he shares our values, as well as our determination to protect them.”Governor Romney believes Roe v. Wade should be overturned as a first step, allowing the States to set abortion policy, as a goal that can be achieved more quickly. For a longer range goal after overturning Roe v. Wade, he supports a Human Life Amendment to the Constitution and endorses legislation to make it clear that the 14th Amendment's protections apply to unborn children.
(The Best Choice Is Also a Good Choice - Why social conservatives should support Mitt Romney for president, National Review Online, Feb. 21, 2007)Romney believes that controversial abortion policy should be decided through the democratic process by citizens in the several states and their elected representatives rather than by federal judicial mandate.
Governor Romney: "I understand that my views on laws governing abortion set me in the minority in our Commonwealth. I am prolife. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother. I wish the people of America agreed, and that the laws of our nation could reflect that view. But while the nation remains so divided over abortion, I believe that the states, through the democratic process, should determine their own abortion laws and not have them dictated by judicial mandate."
("Why I vetoed contraception bill", Boston Globe Op-Ed, July 26, 2005)Gov. Romney Praised The Decision Upholding A Partial-Birth Abortion Ban. "Today, our nation's highest court reaffirmed the value of life in America by upholding a ban on a practice that offends basic human decency. This decision represents a step forward in protecting the weakest and most innocent among us."
(Gov. Mitt Romney, "Statement On Supreme Court's Partial Birth Abortion Ruling," Press Release, 4/18/07)View video of a portion of a speech delivered by Mitt Romney at the National Review Institute Conservative Summit in which he describes a pivotal event in his life while learning about stem cell research and embryo farming from Harvard research scientists. From a researcher's comment explaining that there wasn't a moral issue at stake in the embryo farming process because the embryos are destroyed after 14 days, Romney was hit hard by the harsh realization that, in his words, "We have so cheapened the value and sanctity of human life in our society that someone could think there is not a moral issue because we kill human embryos at 14 days." Gov. Romney publicly affirmed his pro-life position thereafter.
Research Briefing: Promoting A Culture Of Life: The Romney Vision Vs. The Democrat Vision
The influence of family members and events in Mitt Romney's life on matters of abortion are worth considering. They illuminate obstacles he surmounted to adopt pro-life beliefs in his private life. Mitt Romney’s mother, Lenore Romney, advocated a pro-choice position in her unsuccessful 1970 run for the U.S. Senate in Michigan, writing in her campaign platform, "I support and recognize the need for more liberal abortion rights while reaffirming the legal and medical measures needed to protect the unborn and pregnant woman [sic]." Mitt Romney revealed in 1994 that his brother-in-law's sister, a close family friend, died after a botched illegal abortion in the 1960s when Mitt would have been in his teens and early 20s.
(Romney releases mother's statement on abortion issue, Boston Globe, June 28, 2005)In a 2/14/07 appearance on ABC "Good Morning America", Ann Romney talks about her personal struggle with multiple sclerosis and offers her perspective on embryonic stem cell research with a powerful, inspiring message opposing medical experimentation that could conceivably relieve her own suffering. Read a thought-provoking commentary by Alliance Defense Fund attorney David French on Ann Romney's strength of character in opposing embryonic stem cell research as seen in the ABC "Good Morning America" segment.
Gov. Romney made a $15,000 contribution in 2006 to the pro-life group Massachusetts Citizens for Life from the Tyler Charitable Foundation, a joint family trust of Mitt and Ann Romney. They also donated $10,000 to the Massachusetts Family Institute during the same time period.
The Tyler Charitable Foundation has donated more than $2.9 million to more than 40 healthcare groups, schools, and other charitable organizations since 1999.
The Boston Globe noted that as late as 1995, Marie Sturgis, the legislative director for Massachusetts Citizens for Life, considered Romney to be an "abortion rights supporter", as did the national Family Research Council.
Massachusetts Citizen's for Life, you say? Well, let's see what they really have had to say RECENTLY (not in 1995)about Mitt Romney actual RECORD (you know, that thing that you've already said is the most important factor):
Massachusetts Citizens for Life recently gave Gov. Romney their 2007 Mullins Award for Outstanding Political Leadership presented at the Mother's Day Pioneer Valley Dinner where Romney delivered the keynote speech.Massachusetts Citizens For Life Executive Director Marie Sturgis: "Having Governor Romney in the corner office for the last four years has been one of the strongest assets the pro-life movement has had in Massachusetts." (Kathryn Jean Lopez, "An Early Massachusetts Primary," National Review, 1/10/07)
Massachusetts Citizens For Life Pioneer Valley Chapter Chairman Kevin Jourdain: "Mitt Romney was a great Governor, who served with honor and distinction. But most importantly, he was a pro-life Governor. He vetoed a number of pro-abortion pieces of legislation and made many pro-life appointments. He was always there for us." (Kevin Jourdain, Remarks, Agawam, MA, 5/10/07)
found a Log Cabin Republican (of all groups!) advertisement which exposed Romney as having a pro-choice record as being "Mostly True", somewhat mitigated by his recent turnabout to a professed pro-life position.
So, now you're on the pro-radical gay agenda Log Cabin Republicans' side in opposing Mitt Romney due to the fact that Romney is AGAINST the gay agenda, opposes gay marriage, and is the only frontrunning candidate who has supported the Federal Marriage Amendment. Their very opposition to Mitt Romney, that you have cited, proves that Romney is against their agenda. Yet you're trying to attack Romney as if he was for their agenda. You're not making sense.
Which is because they grade on other issues besides just abortion and "life issues". If you look at the actual NRTL scorecards for 1997-1998, 1999-2000, and 2001-2002, we see that each session, the only things they dinged FDT on was his campaign finance "reform" votes (which, admittedly, were very bad decisions). As far as actual, real, true-to-life abortion votes, he is 100%, per the votes they listed each session.
The fact of the matter is, simply, that Fred Thompson did NOT receive 100% pro-life records from the premiere pro-life organization in America.
Here are the facts:
His voting record, according to Project Vote Smart's list of his ratings from National Right to Life, are:
- 1996 86%
- 1997 83%
- 1998 87%
- 1999 75%
- 2000 77%
And according to National Right to Life Committee's own ratings:
If you average the ratings reported by Project Vote Smart, you get only an 81.6% pro-life rating.
If you average the ratings reported directly by the National Right to Life Commitee, you get only a 66% rating.
Since Dr. Willke appears to be either ignorant of or deliberately obfuscating Mitt's pro-choice record, then yes, Dr. Willke is a shill for Romney (though it should be noted that Dr. Willke's choice was apparently made because he suffers from UFOH (Unfounded Fear of Hillary) Syndrome.
So, because you don't agree with this prominent pro-life leader, you cast aspersions about his intelligence, call him stupid, or pretend to read his mind. You're trying to rationalize away this important and unsurpassed pro-life endorsement.
The only dead link in my previous post was the one that was supposed to go to the THOMAS list of amendments to H.R.2020 provided with the bill. Apparently THOMAS doesn't like such links, and allows them to expire. One can easily go to either of the other links (the two pro-life votes by FDT) and click on the bill number itself, then click on "Amendments" and see the list for themselves. The amendment you describe doesn't even APPEAR on that list, however. In fact, I've searched the Congressional Record and cannot find the language nor lines which you describe. Can you kindly provide a link to the text which contains the page and line numbers for verification (since the bill text, either HTML or PDF, seems to be unpaginated)?
You're making statements, basically calling me a liar, about this specific vote and the contents of the amendment on this and a previous thread, but you've just admitted that you don't know what you're talking about and have not actually looked at the Congressional Record to even know if the accusation you directed at me was remotely true. Verifiably false - that's what you called what I said about his vote on this amendment. Well, verify it then, or retract your accusation.
You are comparing apples with oranges. Mitt's public record, up until mid-2005, seems stridently pro-choice, and then he makes a sudden about face. It's not just that he "doesn't have a 100% pro-life voting record" or that he answered some questionnaire questions pro-choice.
You keep saying that like it is true, or something. But all you can provide are a few things that he SAID, not his actual record that you keep SAYING is stridently pro-choice. Other people disagree with you on your interpretation of his record. People like pro-life leaders, pro-life organizations, etc.