The McCain/Kennedy amnesty bill, and now he says he is against amnesty? LOL LOL
If you support Mitt, I'd be careful about making comparisons of his opponents to Kennedy....otherwise people might remind you of this. LOL LOL
Posted on 01/21/2008 11:32:31 PM PST by maui_hawaii
I hear of the tag 'flip flop' being assigned to Mitt Romney by certain groups of people.
What I want to do is pick one (for this example) of where these people who make this charge are incorrect. In doing so, I will respond to that caller who called in to Rush yesterday and wanted Rush to tell her 'where is the record of Mitt's conservatism'.
I will answer her and all others in the process.
Now for facts. Mitt was running in a very liberal state that is friendly to gays and in fact is the hotbed of gay activism.
In the course of the several elections these gay activists were openly hostile to Republicans, and in particular a Mormon Republican.
For those who are unfamiliar with the background, the LDS Church, in one of the few times ever in history to do so, came out publicly and campaigned against gay marriage. In gay politics, Mormons are despised because they enrolled so many people and bankrolled and fought against the redefinition of family.
I remember even going door to door asking people to fight for traditional families.
Gay political extremists knew the LDS position on the matter and in their deluded kind of way tried to paint Mitt as a proactive gay hater. They did the same with the LDS church as a whole.
They got so extreme in their accusations that they were making claims that Mitt and Mormons advocated violence against gays and things like that.
So, what resulted was Mitt took a position that has never changed. He took a classy approach and did not lose his cool under fire.
What was that approach? Love the sinner but not the sin.
He said gays should not be persecuted, or have violence directed at them. He said gays had the right to live in peace. Life Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness.
If they are two consenting adults and they happen to be gay, a public position cannot be to advocate extreme behavior against them. That being said, Mitt also said, while they can be gay all they want in their own homes, they are not, and should not have special treatment as the gay lobby was hoping for. The gay group wanted to redefine marriage so they are 'equal'...
Mitt gave a classy, but firm answer. Live in peace and do your thing if you must, but we are not redefining marriage--- and you (meaning the gay lobby) cannot accuse him of being an extreme right wing gay hater. That position is simply not true.
Mitt's position in a nutshell was, "no we do not approve of your lifestyle, but we will not do two things. 1. Persecute IE advocate violence against gays (as was the accusations) 2. Give them special rights and redefine marriage.
Can you see where he drew the line? I can.
While all this was going on, court cases were in the works and the gay lobby had summarily been put on their collective butts by Mitt Romney. Basically he inferred in no unqualified terms that they should grow up and that their extreme politics don't work.
"You won't let us be gay and be married so that means you are going to send the troops to bash us all in the head like a bunch of baby seals!"....stuff like that... Mitt exposed that for what it was. Hysterical politics aimed squarely at conservative values.
This group then got a victory in that a court case was unilaterally decided to redefine marriage. The gay lobby could not win in the legislature and they definitely couldn't win with the governor... so they got a fiat win in court as to how marriage is defined.
In short order not only was Mitt fighting this group, but he was in fact a leader in the fight for a constitutional ammendment for traditional marriage.
Look at the record. He was testifying for such from the get go and even in front of the Senate.
Mitt tried to disarm a hostile lobbying group, and the result was they got more hostile. You want to know why the MSM hates Mitt? Because he smoothly told them to screw off with their BS extreme politics. Because Mitt was standing his ground, the gay lobby went around him---and everyone else--- to get to their desired outcome.
People here are trying to make the case that Mitt is pro gay--- not so. His position has been clear and consistent. He recognizes that gays are going to exist and that there should not be violence against them. At the same time, their lifestyle should not be enshrined in law. Alternative lifestyle it is, and alternative lifestyle it will remain.
Where is the flip? There is none. Problem is you have people wanting to cherry pick what they want to selectively hear.
The doctor doesn’t deny the meeting, he says he didn’t use the word “kill” to describe the destruction of embryos.
But we know better — if you destroy embryos, you are killing, and Romney recognized that, even though the doctor denies it.
“They don’t want to talk ABOUT issues, they want to BRING UP CHARGES and then move on”.
Kinda sucks for them, but eh, what the ....
Exactly. And most of the time you get auto insurance requirements not for YOU, but for the OTHER GUY.
When it comes to health care, I AM THE OTHER GUY.
False. Provide any info that shows most Americans do backgound checks on the employees of companies that they hire.
I have practiced business law and sudited companies for twenty years, and this practice is unheard of in my experience. One reason is it is unnecessay, since yoyu aren’t responsible for the employees of a company that you hire. The hired company is responsible.
This meeting took place “November 9, 2004”.
If that was the day of his epiphany, why did he continue presenting himself as pro-choice?
* Romney signed the 2005 bill that promotes chemical abortions with Plan B
* In October 2005 Romney asked the federal government for a waiver for a major increase in funding for abortion “counseling” and for tax-funded abortifacients.
Also don’t you find it curious and convenient that he publicly changed his position when he was talking about the possibility to run for president. C’mon guys, I know most here are NOT gullible.
Ha Ha!
I don’t live in some damned city, a machete isn’t a toy, it’s a tool, an important tool. I expect you find that ridiculous. You don’t go on the back part of my land without a machete, a pistol and a compass. I like it that way, I despise concrete.
“Romney is very strong on that one, notwithstanding his stupid comments about “life-long hunter’, and owning a gun.
At least those comments showed he WANTED to be associated with gun owners, and not against them.”
This with his MLK comments, and his promises to Michigan to dump money into their industry, just illustrates he’ll say ANYTHING to get a vote.
Oh ... like his “conversion” to pro-life, his hunter comments happened when !?!?!? ... when he was running for president of course!
” Put up oR shut up?”
I remember posting those words once and you
told me how rude I was. :-)
Getting stressed are we?
Where, show me the SSM document?
and I don't want any document about obeying the courts SSM law?
I want the one document where Mitt romney by himself drew up a document and made SSM a law!
Put up or SHUT UP?
***
VIDEOS
CNN: Gov. ROMNEY FIGHTS FOR MARRIAGE VOTE
CNN: GovGov Mitt Romney on Gay Marriage
REPUBLICAN GOV MITT ROMNEY HATES GAYS
Gordon B. Hinckley-"We're Not Anti-Gay, But Pro-Family!"
CNN: Gov. Romney's Reaction To Mass. Marriage Vote
>He says he was personally against abortion, as a Mormon you could guess he should have been pro-life at some moment.
He has always maintained this position.
>Then he tells a story of a family member that died in an illegal abortion. Now he was pro-choice.
He declined to identify himself with that label, though effectively I agree. But this is the same position his family seemed to have - that the state should not prevent a woman from being able to choose an abortion.
>Then in a meeting the doctor in question denies happened, he was converted to pro-life due to stem cell research. See the image of mutilated babies didn’t do it for him, it was stem cells that changed his mind. Yeah right!
I don’t see why you choose to dismiss that intellectually he finally found himself unable to continue to uphold a woman’s right to have an abortion, once he continued to be confronted with evidence that the state is sanctioning the destruction of human life.
It is a one-time shift.
The McCain/Kennedy amnesty bill, and now he says he is against amnesty? LOL LOL
If you support Mitt, I'd be careful about making comparisons of his opponents to Kennedy....otherwise people might remind you of this. LOL LOL
We're ALL the other guy when it comes to health care. We ALL have to pay additional taxes and higher medical fees to cover those who don't pay for their own health care. Commonwealth Care provided a way for everyone to take advantage of group health insurance programs - even those who don't get such through their employer - and made it mandatory that everyone either be covered by a private health care plan or demonstrate that they can afford to pay for their own health care without such coverage. It was designed to REDUCE the taxpayer burden and lower healthcare costs overall while providing MORE consumer choice and more competition between health care plan providers.
LOL. Tell me another ne. I suppose next you'll be saying that the reason Ted Kennedy and Hillary love Mitt care so much os because they are friends of the taxpayer and support competition!
The vast majority remain uneffected.
thanks...I did read where Romney vetoed the mandated and penalty fees for businesses who didn’t comply but the liderals in the legistlature overode it. I can see from reading more details that Romneys plan is intended in reducing costs so more people could afford healthcare. The liberals screwed with it quite a bit and then Romney gets the blame. I believe some conservatives are sort of knee jerk reactionary on some issues and judge quickly and really need to dig for the facts.
“It is a one-time shift.”
He still supported his pro-choice position after 2004. That like Saint Paul persecuting and killing a few Christians months after the road to Damascus.
His “one-time shift” happened exactly as he was deciding to run for president, as a Republican.
How convenient.
Personal responsibilty at the point of a gun eh? That is the same argument made for the draft and Hillarycare.
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.