No. Romney was solidly pro-abortion through most of 2004...even filling out pro-abortion candidate questionnaires in the 2002 campaign for MA guv. [He wouldn't have been elected in the Bay State otherwise] Beyond that, he supposedly converted in late 2004 -- only to say at a late May press conference 4 yrs ago: "I am absolutely committed to my promise to maintain the status quo with regards to laws relating to abortion and choice."
Ya wanna explain how somebody making a supposed "pro-life conversion" half a year prior to this would make this statement?
Everyone has the right to change their mind, and I applaud Mitt on his change in his stance on abortion. [D Rider]
And Romney changes it, and then changes it again; and then changes it again; and then changes it again...
THE FLiP-FLoP SIDE OF MITT
(1): "'He's been a pro-life Mormon faking it as a pro-choice friendly,'" Romney adviser Michael Murphy told the conservative National Review last year, says the Concord Monitor in a previous article to the one that's being posted. (Source: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061210/REPOSITORY/612100304/1217/NEWS98) = So I guess that made him a below-the-radar "flip" acting like a "flop?"
(2): 1994 campaign in Massachusetts "I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time when my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice." (October, 1994 Senatorial debate vs. Ted Kennedy) = Mitt the flipster from what most LDS represent
(3): Fast forward to 2001, when Romney needs to reassure Utah Mormons that...he's not really "pro-choice," after all: "I do not wish to be labeled pro-choice." (Mitt Romney, Letter to the Editor, The Salt Lake Tribune, 7/12/01) = So he doesn't want to be known as a "flop" (so what is he?)
(4): But by 2002, guess what? He was pro-abortion again! "I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one … Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government's." (Stephanie Ebbert, "Clarity Sought On Romney's Abortion Stance," The Boston Globe, 7/3/05) = Ah, back securely in the "flop" saddle again?
(5): In November of '04, he & his wife had simultaneous pro-life "conversions" where he links it to stem cell research = (So the pro-abortion-but-no-pro-choice-label-please-is-now-a-pro-life-convert? )
(6): On May 27 '05, he affirms his commitment to being "pro-choice" at a press conference. ("I am absolutely committed to my promise to maintain the status quo with regards to laws relating to abortion and choice.") = OK, this is at least a flop from November '04!
(7): What about his gubernatorial record 2003-2006? Mitt THEN says his actions were ALL “pro-life.” So I assume somewhere in 2005 or so were so pro-life decisions. ("As governor, I’ve had several pieces of legislation reach my desk, which would have expanded abortion rights in Massachusetts. Each of those I vetoed. Every action I’ve taken as the governor that relates to the sanctity of human life, I have stood on the side of life.") = So, then THESE ACTIONS were not only a reversal of his 2002 commitment, but his May 27, 2005 press conference commitment. So "flipping" is beginning to be routine
(8): April 12, 2006--Mitt signs his "Commonwealth Care" into existence, thereby expanding abortion access/taxpayer funded abortions for women--including almost 2% of the females of his state who earn $75,000 or more. (Wait a minute, I thought he told us post-'06 that ALL of his actions were "pro-life?"). Also, not only this, but as governor, Romney could exercise veto power to portions of Commonwealth Care. Did Romney exercise this power? (Yes, he vetoed Sections 5, 27, 29, 47, 112, 113, 134 & 137). What prominent section dealing with Planned Parenthood as part of the "payment policy advisory board" did Romney choose NOT to veto? (Section 3) That section mandates that one member of MassHealth Payment Policy Board must be appointed by Planned Parenthood League of MA. (See chapter 58 of the Acts of 2006, section 3 for details).
(9): On January 29, 2007 during a visit to South Carolina, Romney stated: “Over the last multiple years, as you know, I have been effectively pro-choice." (Bruce Smith, "Romney Campaigns in SC with Sen. DeMint," The Associated Press, 1/29/07) = OK how could "every action I've taken as the governor that relates to the sanctity of human life..." AND this statement BOTH be true?
(10): Another South Carolina campaign stop has Romney uttering that "I was always for life”: "I am firmly pro-life… I was always for life." (Jim Davenport, "Romney Affirms Opposition to Abortion," The Associated Press, 2/9/2007) = Oh, of course as the above shows, he's always been pro-life!
(11): "I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro-choice." Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate 8/5/2007 = OK...looking at the 1994 & 2002 campaigns, how could he say he "never said" he was "pro-choice?"
(12): Then comes his 8/12/07 interview with Chris Wallace of Fox: "I never called myself pro-choice. I never allowed myself to use the word pro-choice because I didn't FEEL I was pro-choice. I would protect the law, I said, as it was, but I wasn't pro-choice, and so..." = That whatever he was from 1970 when his mom ran as a pro-abortion senator & he sided with her, to 5/27/05, w/whatever interruption he had due to a pro-life altar call in Nov of '04, whatever that was...well, he assures us it wasn't a pro-abortion inlook or outlook 'cause he didn't ”feel...pro-choice..." = So does that make him a life-long pro-lifer?
So, by now, you'd think we might be done with the twisty, windy road of Mitt Romney's “sanctity of life” quote track record. But, no, 'cause we gotta look at the very issue that Romney said converted him to a “pro-life” position – embryonic stem cell research. And on that, he took three positions over 5.5 years. He was for it in a June, '02 speech. He supposedly "converted" to the entire pro-life cause over this issue in Nov of '04. By Dec of '07 he was telling Katie Couric that he was pro-choice on parents of such embryos exercising either the choice to give up their surplus embryo(s) for adoption, or to "donate" them to "research" (dissection).
In that Dec 07 interview with Couric, in two back-to-back sentences, he uses the terms "parent" and "adoption" to apply to embryos – which sounds very “pro-life”and commendable....only in the next sentence he uses the following terms without seeing any contradiction:
"parent"
"donate"
"research"
He actually said parents of these adoptable embryos who “donated” them to “research” (dissection) was "acceptable."
Now your not saying that the Republican establishment would try to McCain us with Mitt now are you? Of course, they did try to knock Reagan out with their guy Bush, but that was a long time ago. Now they really idolize and respect Reagan like the rest of us./s