Paul Weyrich Convinced Mitt Romney "has sincerely converted" to pro-life side

WASHINGTON, DC, November 7, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Mitt Romney's campaign for President received a major shot in the arm on Monday in the form of an official endorsement from well-known conservative leader and chairman of the Free Congress Foundation, Paul Weyrich. Despite a lingering uncertainty for many conservatives about Romney's authentic conservative persona due to his notorious 'flip-flopping' in recent years, Weyrich's endorsement joins a growing number of similar Romney endorsements from other notable conservative leaders.

Weyrich is the founder of the Heritage Foundation and current chairman of the Free Congress Foundation. He is considered a major leader by most in conservative circles and has written and worked for years to bolster both the social and religious conservative movements in America.

For Mitt Romney, Weyrich's endorsement is monumental. From the very onset of the campaign trail, Romney's campaign has worked feverishly to portray the candidate as the only suitable, and viable, contender worthy of the conservative vote.

To that end, Romney has previously vied for similar endorsements from other conservative leaders. With Weyrich's endorsement, the Romney campaign can more realistically hope to attract further endorsements and, perhaps eventually, the necessary conservative votes to win the Republican nomination.

From the very early days of the campaign trail, the 2008 primary race has been frequently muddied with accusations that the leading Republican candidates are, in fact, barely more socially conservative than the leading Democrats. For example, leading GOP contender, Rudy Guiliani has publicly admitted to being pro-abortion and pro-gay rights and just last week Fred Thompson admitted that he would not run on the pro-life platform of the Republican party because that would, in effect, criminalize "young girls and perhaps their parents as aiders and abettors…"

Weyrich's endorsement took some conservatives by surprise as just recently Weyrich published an article which did not seem to portray the same degree of confidence in Romney's record or abilities. Referring to Romney, Weyrich said, "If he had not flip-flopped and were not a Mormon he would be the ideal candidate. He yet may be. He looks and sounds like a President."

Weyrich Addresses Romney's Flip-Flopping

Mitt Romney

When asked if Romney's history of 'flip-flopping' on life issues in the past concerned him, Weyrich told LifeSiteNews, "I am concerned about it but I have spoken with him at length and I am convinced that he has sincerely converted to the pro-life side and consequently will be with us if elected President. I understand he has flip-flopped but a lot of politicians have. I take the man at his word. I think he has a lot of ability to present himself to the American public."

As Gorver Norquist of the Americans for Tax Reform commented to The Boston Globe, "Weyrich's endorsement will speak loudly to conservatives in general - guys who care about guns and taxes and everything else, but especially religious conservatives."

In the official endorsement statement issued by Romney's campaign office, Weyrich was quoted saying, "Governor Romney has outlined a blueprint to build a stronger America rooted in our common conservative principles. With a clear conservative vision to move America forward, he will strengthen our economy, our military, and our families."

In an earlier NewsMax interview, Weyrich had referred to Romney as someone who "could be supported" and "the best campaigner." Weyrich said, "I think he is somebody who is rushing toward the movement trying to present himself as a conservative and in some ways it's more useful to have somebody like that."

Weyrich also explained to LifeSiteNews that he thought Romney could present a realistic challenge should Senator Clinton receive the Democratic nomination. "Half the country doesn't like her and, as a consequence, any Republican would have a chance against her. Right now [Romney] is down in the polls but he was down in the polls in New Hampshire and South Carolina and he has come up. I think given time and given the resources that he has, I think he will be able to present himself to the American public."

Weyrich Wants to Stop Giuliani From Getting Nomination

Weyrich also offered justification of his endorsement saying, "I felt the race would boil down to Giuliani verse Romney and I certainly do not support Giuliani. I felt there probably would be an effect if Romney wins New Hampshire and now it looks like he has a shot at winning South Carolina and if all that happens it is going to have an effect on Super Tuesday so I felt he would be the best candidate to stop Giuliani"

Weyrich has been quoted in several other articles voicing his opposition to Giuliani saying, "I'm not for Giuliani. I want to try to stop him from getting the nomination."

When asked about possible resistance that Romney might face in regards to his Mormon religion, Weyrich admitted that that could be one of the biggest problems of the campaign. "[H]e has got to make sure that the American public understands we are not electing him head of the Baptist convention - we are electing him President of the United States and what is important are his public policy decisions - beyond his theological stance."

Others Not so Confident About Romney on Abortion and Homosexuality

While Weyrich expressed confidence in Romney's ability to stay strong to his recently found pro-life convictions especially if he can surround himself with supportive personnel, Brian Camenker of MassResistance.org had no such confidence.

Camenker told LifeSiteNews, "Look at the record. His transition team in Massachusetts included the most prolific gay activist in the state and not a single actual conservative."

Camenker said that, since the announcement of Weyrich's endorsement, he has been swamped with emails expressing disappointment in the news.

Referring to Weyrich's endorsement, Camenker commented, "A lot of people feel that this represents the death of the conservative movement in America in many ways. Paul Weyrich signed our letter to Mitt Romney, he knows intimately how Mitt Romney subverted the constitution of Massachusetts in regards to homosexual marriage. He signed a letter that basically rebuked Romney for all of that."

"It's a complete sell-out to principle. One of the things that the conservative movement has represented is standing by principle no matter what and what he [Weyrich] is essentially saying is that Mitt Romney seems one of the least offensive of the top tier Republicans, so I am going to support him anyway. By saying I am going to take the lesser of several evils, that is how we got ourselves in the mess that we are in."

Many conservative throughout the nation have mobilized across the nation to strongly remind the Republican party that social conservativism on life and family issues must be a strong characteristic of any possible nominee if they hope to garner the conservative vote.

Influential James Dobson Has Not Yet Endorsed Any Candidate

Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family has not officially endorsed a candidate for the election and has been vocal about the possibility of supporting a third-party candidate should the GOP nomination go to candidate that has not been consistently pro-life.

In an October opinion piece, he wrote, "I firmly believe that the selection of a president should begin with a recommitment to traditional moral values and beliefs. Those include the sanctity of human life, the institution of marriage, and other inviolable pro-family principles. Only after that determination is made can the acceptability of a nominee be assessed."

Without giving any inclination as to his candidate of preference, Dobson continued saying, "The other approach, which I find problematic, is to choose a candidate according to the likelihood of electoral success or failure. Polls don't measure right and wrong; voting according to the possibility of winning or losing can lead directly to the compromise of one's principles. In the present political climate, it could result in the abandonment of cherished beliefs that conservative Christians have promoted and defended for decades. Winning the presidential election is vitally important, but not at the expense of what we hold most dear."

If Romney Wins Nomination Strong Promises Must be Obtained From Him

When asked by NewsMax for his opinion on the possibility of supporting a third party candidate should Giuliani obtain the nomination, Weyrich said, "If he does get it, and I'm not sure that he will, it seems to me that we need to negotiate with him and determine whether or not we can pin down a whole series of promises that he would make [and then make] a judgment as to whether those promises are any good."

Romney also holds favorable endorsements from other conservative leaders such as Mary Ann Glendon, newly nominated US ambassador to the Holy See, Bob Jones, Jack Willke and well-known pro-life lawyer James Bopp, Jr.

Robertson Stuns Conservatives With Endorsement of Giuliani

However, just this week influential evangelist Pat Robertson shocked many in conservative circles by endorsing Rudy Giuliani calling him "more than acceptable to people of faith." Surprisingly, Robertson dismissed concerns over Giuliani's very liberal social views on life and family saying that they "pale into insignificance" when compared to Giuliani's ability to address the issue of terrorism.

Operation Rescue is so incensed with Robertson's move that it has called for a protest outside Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network studios on Saturday at 1:30 p.m.

In a press release Operation Rescue founder Randall Terry states, "Rudy has perfect credentials on social issues like child-killing, partial birth abortion, federal funding for 'poor women' to have abortions, and so-called homosexual marriage or civil unions…"

In similar news, former presidential candidate Sam Brownback officially offered his endorsement to Senator John McCain praising him for consistently "standing up for human rights around the world, including a consistent 24-year pro-life record of protecting the rights of the unborn." Brownback's official statement asserted that, "John McCain is the only candidate who can rally the Reagan coalition of conservatives, independents and conservative Democrats needed to defeat Hillary Clinton or any other Democrat in the general election next year."

I don’t trust someone who changes positions and says he didn’t, but Mitt will tell you about why he changed his mind

The problem is timing. He appears to change his opinions when it's convenient to do so. I'd prefer somebody who changed his opinions before that point.

In Romney's case, it would have been more impressive if he did it before running for office in MA, rather than just before trying to sell himself to a more conservative electorate than he faced in MA.

It's like a trial witness who gets a get-out-of-jail card for telling their story a certain way. You have reason to doubt their credibility.

Hmmm...and in your accusation that Mitt Romney bribed Paul Weyrich, by donating to the FCF, to obtain his endorsement, what was the amount of that bribe?

I'm sure we'll find out eventually, just as these gems were uncovered back in march:

WASHINGTON -- In the months before announcing his bid for the Republican presidential nomination, former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts contributed tens of thousands of dollars of his personal fortune to several conservative groups in a position to influence his image on the right.
Last December, a foundation controlled by Romney made contributions of $10,000 to $15,000 to each of three Massachusetts organizations associated with major national conservative groups: the anti-abortion Massachusetts Citizens for Life, Massachusetts Citizens for Limited Taxation and the Christian conservative Massachusetts Family Institute.
Romney and a group of his supporters also contributed a total of about $10,000 to a nonprofit group affiliated with National Review. Over the past two years, he contributed $35,000 to the Federalist Society, an influential network of conservative lawyers. And in December 2005, he contributed $25,000 to the Heritage Foundation, a leading conservative research organization.
The recipients of Romney's donations said the money had no influence on them. But some of the groups, notably Citizens for Life and the Family Institute, have turned supportive of Romney after criticizing him in the past.
Coming on the eve of his presidential campaign, Romney's contributions could create the appearance of a conflict of interest for groups often asked to evaluate him. All the groups said he had never contributed before, and his foundation's public tax filings show no previous gifts to similar groups.

It is a shame that the going rate for selling out to a liberal RINO appears to be as low as $10,000 to $35,000.

Maintaining the status quo is NOT a "pro-life record".

It's arguable, then, that neither is lobbying for a pro-abortion group. In any event, you can see from the letter linked above, that the pro-life and pro-family leaders in Massachusetts welcomed Romney's conversion to their side and his assistance with their causes.

What pro-active things has your candidate done in the recent past to further the cause? Where's your candidate's letter of support from pro-life and pro-family leaders with whom he's worked to strengthen families and protect life?

The last part of that sentence was NOT in the presentation -- it was an editorial statement by the Boston Globe. The inclusion at the end of a quote about the presentation might make some people think it was IN the presentation. But you can see that the entire last sentence was NOT a quote but a summary by the reporter, and the words after the semi-colon added by that reporter and not a summary of what was in the report.

Yes, I know the phrase "that view is due at least in part to the fact that by any reasonable standard it's true" was 100% editorial. Are you telling me, tho, that "phony" and "political opportunist" was not in the PowerPoint presentation uncovered by the Globe? (And if it wasn't, why the quotations?).

neither is lobbying for a pro-abortion group

I'll take 3 hours of contacting low-level Administration officials some 16 or so years ago to have them clarify their position versus supporting the substance of Roe v. Wade and pledging support for taxpayer-funded abortions when he last ran for office. (And Mitt delivered on the latter with RomneyCare.)

pro-life and pro-family leaders in Massachusetts welcomed Romney's conversion to their side and his assistance with their causes

Yes, #44 above shows quite clearly that they appreciated Romney's (financial) "assistance" for their causes, once he decided to run for President.

“Ronaldus Maximus started out as a Democrat, and became a Conservative and Republican over time by observing and thinking about the world around him. People change. I know this for a fact, because I changed, too. If you can’t accept the possibility of anyone else sincerely adopting your point of view without being born that way, what is the function of reasoned discourse? How will you gather anyone to your cause if you won’t let them in the door?”

A conservative democrat formally changing parties back in a different time and a different world in 1962, has nothing to do with a campaign strategy leading a republican to switch to conservative in 2005 for the election cycle.

Romney’s father was a three term Rep. governor, Romney was present and proudly watched his father storm out of the 1964 convention in protest against the Goldwater conservatives.

Romney proudly watched his father go down as the liberal, anti war republican candidate for president.

Romney proudly watched as his mother ran as a pro abortion candidate for the senate in 1970.

During the sixties Romney stayed liberal, Roe vs Wade kept him pro choice, Carter? no effect, Clinton years? no effect, 2000 election? no effect, 9/11? no effect, watch him campaigning in 2002, then he made the most sweeping list of reversals in beliefs that I have ever seen a politician make, all around 2005.

During the Reagan years Romney even registered as independent and did not support Reagan. In other words he stayed liberal during the Reagan revolution and the following Gingrich revolution.

We can show you many videos of his campaigning in 1994 and 2002, including running away from the Reagan revolution.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4

To try to drag Ronald Reagan into Romney’s sorry ass political history is obscene.

I too believe that "adamantly" was not a well chosen word. Recall, however, that the word was not used in a prepared speech, press release, advertisement, etc. It was simply an off-the-cuff remark made in an interview on a Sunday news program.

Throwing in a word like "adamantly" is not a slip of the tongue -- it was either deliberate or simply reflects what Romney actually thinks. In the former case, it proves he's a scumbag; in the latter, catching him in the rare unscripted moment merely strongly suggests that he's a scumbag.

Don't forget Mitt became a two-time LDS bishop and one-time missionary prez during the mid-1980s. Did serving in a "pastoral" type role within a primarily pro-life body help? (Nope. No effect). As 1994, he was as rabidly pro-abortion as ever.

Right. LOL.

Mitt Romney received the endorsement of an anti-abortion group, Massachusetts Citizens For Life, in his Republican primary race for the 1994 Senate election. (Ed Hayward, "Anti-abortion group endorses Romney bid," Boston Herald, 9/08/1994)

Pro-life activist, James Bopp, Jr., wrote:

"Romney’s conversion was less abrupt than is often portrayed. In his 1994 Senate run, Romney was endorsed by Massachusetts Citizens for Life and kept their endorsement, even though he declared himself to be pro-choice, because he supported parental-consent laws, opposed taxpayer-funded abortion and mandatory abortion coverage under a national health insurance plan, and was against the Freedom of Choice Act, which would have codified Roe v. Wade by federal statute.

As Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe put it: "Romney’s very public migration rightward over the last few years is . . . intended not to hide his real views but to liberate them.

Maintaining the status quo is NOT a "pro-life record".

It is when you're in a bluer-than-blue state with an 85% Democrat legislature. National Right to Life founder Dr. John Willke endorsed Romney due to his pro-life record. National Right to Life lead attorney James Bopp not only endorsed Romney, but decided to join the campaign. Massachusetts Citizens for Life also endorsed Mitt Romney because of his pro-life record.

"Unlike other candidates who only speak to the importance of confronting the major social issues of the day, Governor Romney has a record of action in defending life. Every decision he made as Governor was on the side of life. I know he will be the strong pro-life President we need in the White House." - Dr. John Willke

Some questions for Mr. Weyrich:

1) Even the latest version of Mitt approves of the destruction of human embryos for the purpose of scientific experimentation, if someone arbitrarily deems them "unwanted." How can any "conversion" be real, in the light of this fact?

2) The latest version of Mitt has adopted the phony federalism that puts states' rights above unalienable rights. Since this position is anathema to the founding principles contained in the Declaration of Independence, is contrary to the primary purpose of our Constitution as spelled out in the Preamble, and is a violation of the personhood of the unborn and the protection of their lives as spelled out in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, how can you dream that this man is in any way pro-life, or moored in his heart and mind to the American creed?

3) Mitt and his staff have consistently run away from responsibility for the fact that abortions are being performed TODAY using taxpayer funds under the "CommonwealthCare" plan that HE signed into law. How does this square with a true spirit of repentance, Paul?

4) Even if you are foolish enough to take Mitt Romney's word about his so-called "conversion," in spite of the overwhelming evidence that it is as phony as a three-dollar bill, would your church make a life-long reviler and proponent of the most vile anti-Christian attitudes your pastor overnight? Would that not be begging destruction for your church AND the "repentant sinner"? Even Saul of Tarsus had to prove himself...

To make Mitt Romney the de facto leader of the pro-life movement, the conservative movement, the Republican Party, the United States, and the free world, would be the height of foolishness. Paul Weyrich, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Thank you for providing us a record of how generous Mitt Romney, his wife, and his various foundations have been to conservative organization.

However, you made a specific accusation that Weyrich's endorsement was bought by Mitt Romney with a donation to Weyriche's foundation. You then stated that the foundation you were referring to was the Free Congress Foundation. What I fail to see in this article you have copy/pasted here is any mention of the FCF. You have failed to back up your slander of Paul Weyrich and Mitt Romney with relevant facts. But don't let that slow you down. That's par for the course around here.

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.