Posted on 02/08/2008 3:05:07 PM PST by AFA-Michigan
One party, at least, is sad to see him go.
...When Democrats looked at Romney, we also saw the perfect candidate — for us to run against. The best presidential candidates have the ability to change people's minds. Mitt Romney never got that far because he never failed to change his own mind first.
So when Romney gamely suspended his campaign this afternoon, there was heartfelt sadness on both sides of the aisle. Democrats are sorry to lose an adversary whose ideological marathon vividly illustrated the vast distance a man must travel to reach the right wing of the Republican Party.
...Romney's farewell at the Conservative Political Action Committee meeting shows how far the once-mighty right wing has fallen. In an introduction laced with barbs in McCain's direction, Laura Ingraham's description of Mitt as "a conservative's conservative" said all there is to say about Romney's campaign and the state of the conservative movement. If their last, best hope is a guy who only signed up two years ago and could hardly convince them he belonged, the movement is in even worse shape than it looks.
...Romney pandered with conviction. He even tried to make it a virtue, defending his conversion on abortion by telling audiences that he would never apologize for being a latecomer to the cause of standing up for human life. Conservatives thanked him for trying but preferred the genuine article. In Iowa, Romney came in second to a true believer, and New Hampshire doesn't have enough diehards to put him over the top.
...McCain was authentic, Huckabee was conservative, and Romney couldn't convince enough voters he was either one.
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
Well said. You're exactly right.
“Mitt changed his position back in 2002 to being PRO LIFE. I did too - bite me! People are allowed to change their minds.”
He first said that he was prolife in 2005 and said that he converted after having a discussion on embryos back on Nov. 9, 2004.
“Mitt changed his position back in 2002 to being PRO LIFE.”
That’s certainly a false statement.
Video: Nov. 2, 2002 gubernatorial campaign debate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4
Video: 2002 TV interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKwVNUz52vo
Romney claims it happened in November 2004, which he didn’t announce til July 2005. After which he signed into law a mandatory state healthcare plan including a $50 co-pay for abortion on demand. After which his administration required Catholic hospitals to dispense the morning after pill. After which the Republican National Coalition for Life said his position was not “pro-life.”
I think of the ridiculous comparison of Reagan growing and Romney not, as comparing a pre history man with a post history man.
A politician in 1900 would look kind of silly using a story of 1840 Abraham Lincoln to justify his current wrong headed views.
Congratualtions - two more Demoncrats running -
McPain in the arse and the backslidden Baptist, the Huckster!
Congratualtions - two more Demoncrats running -
McPain in the arse and the backslidden Baptist, the Huckster!
“Mitt did not endorse gays in the military “
“One issue I want to clarify concerns President Clinton’s “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t pursue” military policy. I believe that the Clinton compromise was a step in the right direction. I am also convinced that it is the first of a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation’s military. That goal will only be reached when preventing discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern, which is a goal we share.”
I'm not at all convinced Mitt changed, period. And I'm not a McCain or Huckabee supporter either.
Baffles the mind is right.
Romney’s campaign was nothing more than money and anti-McCain sentitment.
“Romney was pro growth and tax cut and for winning the war. That is a combination that is simple and hard for Dems to beat.
That is why Dems and libs attacked him and only him during the campaign...and still do today. 2012 isn’t far away.”
And evidently not just Dems and Libs. It is amazing to me that there is still so much vitriol towards Romney on FR. According to the FR poll, more people on FR supported Romney during the primaries. It seems idiotic to me that you keep going after him. The only thing your doing is turning people off. The libs have Bush deraingment syndrome, the Hucksters have Romney deraingment syndrome.
NMH, your post appropriately begins: “So many lies, where does one begin?”
However, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you’re simply ignorant rather than consciously lying. (Though you are obviously willing to falsely accuse someone else of lying based on your ignorance.)
You say: “Mitt doesn’t control the rulings of Judges as in gays in the Boy Scouts.”
Didn’t say he did, and his position on that issue has nothing to do with any court case. He said: “I feel that all people should be allowed to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEOJNw4lmlI
He has never retracted that view, and last year reiterated his opposition to the Scouts national policy by saying he believes each local Scout council should decide whether to protect young boys from exposure to boys or men who engage in homosexual activity. (Why not each troop, Mitt?)
You falsely say: “Mitt changed his position back in 2002 to being PRO LIFE.”
That’s flatly false, as already demonstrated in multiple other posts in this thread.
You falsely said: “Mitt did not endorse gays in the military.”
Sure he did, in his letter to the homosexual Log Cabin Republicans seeking their endorsement.
Romney wrote:
“One issue I want to clarify concerns President Clinton’s ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ military policy. I believe that the Clinton compromise was a step in the right direction. I am also convinced that it is the first of a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation’s military. That goal will only be reached when preventing discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern, which is a goal we share.”
Photocopy of full letter:
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/record/RomneyLogCabinLetter.pdf
You said: “No President will overturn Roe vs Wade. That will also have to come from the U.S.S.C. and Mitt would have appointed conservative judges...”
Why should we believe that, when in Mass he appointed more liberal Dems to the court than Repubs, including a homosexual activist from the Lesbian & Gay Bar Association?
You wrote: “BTW, it is MITT who was endorsed by the Pro life.”
Again, false. When running for governor in 2002, Mitt sought and received the endorsement of the pro-abortion Republican Majority for Choice PAC.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/013/222htyos.asp
This year, National Right to Life endorsed Fred Thompson.
As of this week, over a dozen state Right to Life groups have endorsed Huckabee.
To prove that your assertion is factual, name one pro-life group that’s endorsed Romney.
You write: “If you want to continue lying - that’s your business.”
You have yet to produce — because you can’t — any evidence that anything I’ve posted is not true.
You’re the one who’s posted false statements (see above), which again, I’ll assume were based on simple ignorance.
But if you don’t know what you’re talking about, which you obviously don’t, it would be wise not to continue to accuse others of lying based on your ignorance. That just embarrasses you, not me.
NMH: “Quite a few on FR...still have the need to propagate lies even though a conservative candidate withdrew. Stomp on the dead body — no class what so ever.”
And thus you’re put on notice: the obvious attempts now to posture Mass liberal Mitt Romney for some future election by lionizing and legendizing him as the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan ‘76, the alleged standard bearer-in-waiting for the conservative movement, will be met just as aggressively with the absolute truth of his liberal pro-abort, pro-”gay rights,” pro-gun control, Reagan-dissing record.
NMH: “Some posters wouldn’t know a true conservative if one bit them in the arse.”
All I gotta do is look in the mirror.
McCain is THE MAN now.
I'm waiting for the NYT to drop the other shoe on the new McCain scandal. They're holding it until McCain is firmly the nominee. McCain has hired a lawyer to try to suppress the story. He has been accused of doing legislative favors for a female lobbyist. The female lobbyist has also retained a lawyer. One doesn't spend money on lawyers if there is no need to do so. Stand by.
No matter how many times you lie about Mitt, it doesn’ make it so.
So, now you have TWO LIBERALS to chose from, McPain in the arse and the backslidden Baptist, the Huckster. This should please you to no end. TRUE blue blooded LIBERALS. Together or separately they make Mitt look like the ultimate conservative.
So you go, BOY - vote for em! Make those LIBERAL RHINO’s, er “Republicans” proud. You lie like a rug and you’ll fit in just fine.
Mitt Romney Receives Pro-Life Group’s Award, Mentions Abortion Change
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
May 11, 2007
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) — Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney received an award from the state pro-life group in Massachusetts last night. During his keynote speech, he talked about the evolution of his position on abortion despite recent comments that he was tired of being questioned about it.
Romney’s remarks came during the Massachusetts Citizens for Life’s Mother’s Day dinner.
He acknowledged his shift on abortion a couple years ago in a statement after getting the award.
“It is an honor to receive this award. I recognize that it is awarded for where I am on life, not for where I have been,” he said.
“I respect the fact that you arrived at this place of principle a long time ago. And I appreciate the fact that you are inclined to honor someone who arrived here only a few years ago,” Romney added.
Romney told the audience that his change of heart is evidence of their “relentless campaign to promote the sanctity of human life” and that it “bears fruit.”
Romney spoke at length about his shift on the issue of abortion — “And so I publicly acknowledged my error, and joined with you to promote the sanctity of human life,” he said.
(Mitt’s a bigger man than you’ll ever be. He admits his mistake while you go on LYING about the man - shame on YOU)
But that comes after complaining about questions on it during a Monday night interview on the Fox News Channel program “Hannity and Colmes.”
“What I find interesting is, had I been pro-life and then changed to pro-choice, no one would ask the question,” the former Massachusetts governor said on the show.
He added: “But if you go the other direction, as I have ... and it’s like the media can’t get enough of it: ‘Oh, well, why did you change?’ “
During the remainder of Romney’s speech, the former governor made the kind of remarks he needed to in order to attract support from the pro-life community and show he understands the pro-life perspective he claims to support.
“What some see as a mere clump of cells is actually a human life,” he said. “Human life has identity. Human life has the capacity to love and be loved. Human life has a profound dignity, undiminished by age or infirmity.”
“Make no mistake: abortion [is] .. not [a] right to be discovered in the Constitution,” he explained.
Romney also talked about the kind of justice he would appoint to the Supreme Court and cited comments Chief Justice John Roberts made at his confirmation hearing, when he described the role of a judge.
Roberts said, “Judges and Justices are servants of the law, not the other way around. Judges are like umpires. Umpires don’t make the rules, they apply them...and I will remember that it’s my job to call balls and strikes and not to pitch or bat.”
Romeny concluded, “Now that’s the type of Justice that I would appoint to the court.”
http://www.lifenews.com/nat3112.html
Vote for LIBERALS - McPain or the petty Huckabee. Actually your pettiness makes me think you’d like Huck better - he’s a shifty liar.
“sad” is you peddling a leftist websites’ screed as some kind of wisdom when it’s attack-journalism pap.
Want to blame someone for McCain being the nominee? Hey, you made this bed. Now sleep in it.
fish hawk points out one of many reasons why Romney would make a great President ...
“I didn’t like Romney because he was a “Conservative”, even though he is more conservative than McCain and Huckster. I liked him because he was a very good business man and actually made out a payroll for employees and had to fight the the red tape of Washington law makers. I figured he would be better at running the country, hopefully like a business than what it is now, a giveaway program. I felt the same way about Lee Iaccoca several years ago when he took a bankrupt co. and got it out of debt.”
“I’m gonna go vote for Mitt tomorrow.”
Good for you! I will vote for Mitt Romney on march 4th.
NMH: “Quite a few on FR...still have the need to propagate lies even though a conservative candidate withdrew. Stomp on the dead body — no class what so ever.”
AFA ...: “And thus you’re put on notice ... “
... Yes, NMH, you are put on notice that everything you say is true. AFA-Mich will be flogging a dead horse and pinging you with regurgitated distortions against Mitt Romney that we’ve seen and debunked 20 times before.
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.