[bw17]

“He’s been a *PRO-LIFE* Mormon faking it as a pro-choice friendly,” Romney adviser Mike Murphy told the National Review in 2006.

---

So unless you’re a pro-choice friendly, why would you care? The people closest to Mitt say that he’s been on the pro-life side all along.

[Leisler]

I respect people who I disagree with, if they are honest. They might be in error, or me. We can find out. I might be correct, but lazy and an opponent is doing good work to make me communicate better.

But, liars can’t be dealt with. They’re sick. And I especially hate Republican liars.

I can not trust anything Mitt says. Matter of fact, over say a term of 3 or so years, he’s never been political consistent about anything save being President which in and of itself is suspect.

If you want to go with a snake on a slippery rock, more power to you.

You have my answer.

[P-Marlowe]

The people closest to Mitt say that he’s been on the pro-life side all along.

I have no respect for a man who would be pro life in his conscience and yet pretend to be pro-abortion in order to get elected to office. I prefer a man who is firm in his convictions. The only thing that Romney is firm on is his lust for power.

If he has beem a pro-life sheep in pro-abortion wolf's clothing and you add to that the insistence upon $50 abortions in MASS, then Romney is a creep of the lowest order.

We don't need a president who gained power by lying about his abortion views as a strategy to gain an office of public trust. Here is a man who clearly sold his soul to the devil to gain power. Regardless of his religious affiliation, he is not worthy of the office of President of the United States.

[Osage Orange]

So unless you’re a pro-choice friendly, why would you care? The people closest to Mitt say that he’s been on the pro-life side all along.

And it doesn't bother you that he would lie about it. Just to be elected?