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.
Yeah, but MYTH joined the NRA last year at the age of 59 for the first time in his life so I guess that makes him more gung ho than John Rambo.
You know, I can understand a guy lying through his teeth and saying anything to get elected.
What I cannot understand are the imbeciles that believe him.
After talking about traditional marriage at a Concord, New Hampshire, town hall meeting, Romney was confronted by Cynthia Fish. She’s gay. The exchange went like this:
“I am a gay woman and I have children. Your comment that you just made, it sort of invalidates my family. I wish you could explain to me more, why if we are sending our troops over to fight for liberty and justice for all throughout this country, why not for me? Why not for my family?” …
“Wonderful, I’m delighted that you have a family and you’re happy with your family. That’s the American way. ... People can live their lives as they choose and children can be a great source of joy, as you know. And I welcome that. There are other ways to raise kids that’s fine: single moms, grandparents raising kids, gay couples raising kids. That’s the American way, to have people have their freedom of choice.”
“Please stay on topic and we can discuss that in the next threads”.
Are you threatening to assimilate us?
Instead of making a false accusation stand up for your postion and provide evidence.
No one has fought harder for traditional marriage than Mitt. He even lobbied congress for an amendment defining marriage between a man and a woman. McCain opposed it in congress and Thompson said he opposed the amendment.
Just what have other candidates done about this issue?
This particular issue is incredibly low on my personal list of things to worry about when it comes to Mitt... As someone else said — what about the 2nd Amendment, Government Madated Health Care, etc... etc...??? I suppose you’re tackling the easy ones first? Looking forward to seeing you try to defend the two above-mentioned issues.
“Put it out there on the table. Tell us.”
She’s been dead for 40 years stupid... Something’s wrong with you.
Flip.... Flop.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/12/romney-attended.html
ABC News’ Rick Klein Reports: Mitt Romney attended a fund-raising reception for Planned Parenthood in 1994 in conjunction with a $150 donation his wife made to the organization — notwithstanding Romney’s contention that he had “no recollection” of the circumstances under which his wife gave money to the abortion-rights group.
In the photograph obtained by ABC News, Romney and his wife, Ann, are shown in a yellow-and-white tent chatting with local political activists, including Nicki Nichols Gamble, who was then president and CEO of the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts.
Nichols Gamble — whose back is the camera in the photograph — told ABC that the event was a Planned Parenthood fundraising “house party” in Cohasset, Mass., in June 1994. At the time, Romney, R-Mass., was locked in a tight Senate campaign with Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and was touting his support for abortion rights.
That event, Nichols Gamble said, was the occasion where Ann Romney wrote her $150 check — drafted on a joint checking account she had with her husband — to Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts.
“They were both there, and I remember very well chatting with both of them, and talking about his support for the pro-choice agenda,” she said. “We talked about the fact that he was taking a pro-choice position on the issues, and we were very pleased about that.”
When asked by reporters earlier this year whether the former governor had ever donated money to Planned Parenthood, the Romney campaign said no. Aides subsequently conceded that Romney’s wife, Ann, wrote a $150 check to the group in 1994.
I’m having too much fun with these MYTHSTERS, these WILLARDS RATS.
Your dumbass is trying to prevent people from talking about the issues.
Maui, since your post is false, I’ll assume that you’re simply ignorant and did not knowingly intend to post what amounts to a whitewashing lie about Romney’s record of support for the homosexual agenda.
Romney does indeed support “special rights” and special “protected class” status based on homosexual behavior, and he has endorsed nearly every element of homosexual activists’ political agenda except legalizing so-called homosexual “marriage.”
Even on marriage, Romney has flip-flopped. In 2002, as a candidate for governor, he publicly opposed a Marriage Protection Amendment proposed by pro-family groups. After the horse was out of the corral, he flipped on the issue and fashioned himself a champion of constitutionally protecting marriage.
He endorsed full-fledged gays in the military in 1994, a position he let stand until a December 2006 interview with National Review. He endorsed Kennedy’s federal “special rights based on homosexual behavior” legislation, a position he let stand until the same NR interview.
However, on Dec 16, 2007 on Meet the Press, he renewed his endorsement of “special rights” legislation enacted at the state level, the very type of law which (1) forced Catholic Charities to abandon adoption services in Boston, and is (2) used by state and local governments to discriminate against and punish the Boy Scouts, the Salvation Army, and other individuals, businesses, and groups who oppose the homosexual agenda.
Speaking of Boy Scouts, he opposes the BSA’s national policy protecting young boys from exposure in Scouting to other boys or adults who engage in homosexual behavior.
He also endorsed taxpayer-funded same-sex benefits for the homosexual partners of state employees, plus legal recognition of homosexual “domestic partnerships.”
He signed budgets for the Gov’s Gay & Lesbian Youth Commission that promoted homosexuality as normal and healthy in Mass’s public school system.
He appointed at least one homosexual activist to a judgeship. And of course, all of this is why he was endorsed in each of his previous political campaigns by the homosexual Log Cabin Republicans.
So, to recap:
He has flip-flopped on a state Marriage Protection Amendment, gays in the military, and Kennedy’s federal “gay rights” legislation.
He has not flip-flooped on his support for same-sex benefits for government employees, legal recognition of domestic partnerships, or his opposition to the Boy Scouts’ ban on homosexual Scouts or Scoutmasters.
Now let’s address the multitude of other issues on which he’s clearly demonstrably flip-flopped. Would you care to start with abortion?
I don't know how I will ever be able to recover from that one.
Here is a good source to read about the health care plan plus every other issue.
http://www.freerepublic.com/~unmarkedpackage/#healthcare
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.