Posted on 03/12/2010 11:23:26 AM PST by Colofornian
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Mitt Romney is likely one of several Republican candidates who will vie for the GOP nomination and the right to take on pro-abortion President Barack Obama. For his 2008 attempt at representing Republicans, Romney caused consternation by talking about his position change on abortion and he is doing it again.
Appearing on the "Imus in the Morning" radio program with Don Imus this morning, Imus asked Romney to revisit his position change.
"Well, you know, I never really called myself pro-choice, but I did say when I was running for governor that I would keep the law as it was," Romney said.
But that appears to contradict what he said at the 2007 GOP Iowa straw poll debate.
"Look, I was pro-choice. I am pro-life. You can go back to YouTube and look at what I said in 1994. I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro-choice. I changed my position. And I get tired of people that are holier-than-thou because they've been pro-life longer than I have," he said then.
American Spectator writer W. James Antle noticed the Imus comment and said Romney could hurt his own chances of getting the nomination in 2012 by revisiting his former position in favor of legal abortions.
"Romney's problem has never really been that he changed his mind. It has been the fact that he can't resist insulting people's intelligence about his past record when discussing his current position," Antle writes.
"This is a perfect political climate for Romney to downplay abortion and run as an economic problem-solver. But if he continues to pretend he was never pro-choice or play word games about his previous stance, abortion will plague his candidacy again in 2012," Antle continues.
For pro-life advocates, overturning the Roe v. Wade abortion decision so abortion can again be prohibited has always been a hallmark of a true pro-life stance.
During a January 2008 campaign stop in Nevada, Romney said he lined up with the pro-life movement against Roe.
"I am pro-life, and I would welcome a time when the people of America concluded that abortion was wrong, but that's not where America is, and that's why I believe that the next right step for America is for the court to overturn Roe v. Wade," he said. "That would return to the states and to the elected representatives of the people the ability to set their own laws related to abortion."
Romney converted to a pro-life position after years of supporting legalized abortion.
He also said during the 2008 presidential campaign that he supports a federal human life amendment as a second goal after first toppling Roe and letting states ban abortions again.
Any Republican taking on Obama would face a president who has compiled a lengthy pro-abortion record.
Any move to have this guy run for GOP candidate in 2012 is a wrong turn, and it’s a wrong turn in the middle of the intersection, the instant you see the steering wheel move towards him. Even before that, it’s a wrong turn as soon as the blinker lever is flipped. Even before that, it’s a wrong turn as soon as the neurons come together and form the thought “Hmmm, maybe I should turn that way”.
Iowa debates have not been good for Romney.
I tried to like Romney, I really did, but he could not win me over during the debates, If you closed your eyes and just listen to his answers he did not sound like the Reagan Conservative I am looking for. But what really did it, was at the Iowa Debate, the famous “Show of Hands” question.
Q: “Show of hands - How many of you believe Climate Change is a serious threat, and caused by human activity?”
Before Fred saved their butts with his “we are not playing hands” response, Romney, Rudy, McCain, and I think Huckabee all had their hands up. And watch Romney after Fred’s brave interruption, clap his hands and say he agrees with Fred. A little too late for that, he was caught with his hand up. That’s not leadership, that’s me too, me too.
Then after, you here the most idiotic rambling and soft peddling from just about all of them until it was time to move on to the next question. As a Republican, I was embarrassed. Not one of them looked like a Leader on the issue, except for Fred but they wouldn’t let him answer. Not one of them had the brass ones to tell the moderator, “look, there is not one bit of solid evidence that Man is causing any sort of climate change, and were not going to throw billions and billions of dollars at something we don’t even know we can fight”.
Now an answer like that on National TV would have had me and Republicans all over saying YES!, and probably would of sparked our interest in the candidate. But it didn’t happen.
In case you forgot, here is that question on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAYtC_jcK1U
Let me sell you this 1983 Olds; Only owner was a 70 year old widow. She drove it to Church on Sundays and to get groceries. Been up on blocks ever since Carter got elected!
Never mind that puddle of oil under the motor, that was from a car that was parked there yesterday! Why does it smoke so bad when it runs? Why, that's because we washed the motor and got some water in the tailpipe! Oh, and that loud clacking noise coming from the engine? That's normal! That's because it hasn't been run for a while, but that will go away after you drive it for a while!
Now, just sign here SUCk....Ummm, SON! You're gonna love this ride I'm practically GIVING you! And don't fergit the name; Honest Mitt's used cars!
You forgot the (BARF ALERT) on your title. It’s mandatory at FR, you know.
Quite simply, Mitt is a LIAR, he says whatever he thinks the group he is talking to wants to hear.
If it weren’t for the fact that we have some Mormons who are blindly devoted to him we wouldn’t be debating this. I cannot even imagine what an embarrassing spectacle FR would be if Catholic voters blindly followed Catholic politicians just because they happen to have an “R” after their name.
Doing the Romney Reverse.
To Mitt: So while you were not actively saying you were pro-choice, you were keeping up your disguise by voluntarily and privately donating to pro-choice/anti-life groups. Sure, I believe you... just as much as I believe Obama’s “change” will be good for America.
Yeah, well, just pointing out what a bold-faced liar he is. Slick Willard makes Slick Willie look like a parsing amateur.
Mitt RomneyCARE's ghostwriter of his
book pushes version 2.0 of Mitt RomneyCARE's opinion on BHO, but .....
Peter Horry: ”When Romney wins, if he wins, a little self examination
may be in order. You may want to ask yourself “if I had spent my time promoting
candidates, who possessed my ideology, could I have garnered more support and had
more of an effect... just a thought..
Gonna leave you alone now, maybe you'll calm down
and eat you (sic) banana.“
Best,
Chris
How is Romney an economic problem solver??
RomneyCare is a failure.
ACCEPT NO SUBSTITUTES!
Best,
Chris
In the age of video and audio one should never make statements that one can be called on.
But did he?
He supposedly underwent a pro-life "altar call" in late 2004. But by May 27, 2005, he was still singing praises to the god of abortion: "I am absolutely committed to my promise to maintain the status quo with regards to laws relating to abortion and choice." (press conference comment) (So that’s “pro-life?”)
Furthermore, his so-called "conversion" was based upon a supposed "rethink" of embryonic stem cell research.
Few people in the media point to Mitt's interview with Katie Couric late into his last campaign (December, 2007): December 5, 2007: ...surplus embryos...Those embryos, I hope, could be available for adoption for people who would like to adopt embryos. But if a parent decides they would want to donate one of those embryos for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable. It should not be made against the law."
Any "inquiring minds" want to try to wrap those minds around how a politician can in one sentence...
...discuss "adopting" embryos out (which was certainly a great thing to mention!)
-- but then in the very NEXT breath say that if a "PARENT" wants to be "pro-choice" (Mitt used the word "decides" -- typical "pro-choice" verbiage)
--"to donate one of those embryos for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable???"
Say what????
How about 8-month gestationally-aged infants in the womb, Mitt?
Or already-born infants, too, Mitt?
If a "parent decides they would want to donate one of those...for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable," too, Mitt???
No???
What's the difference, then, Mitt? Here you call parents of embryos "parents" -- but these are "parents" with "research" give-away rights?
How bizarre that we have such schizophrenic "pro-life/pro-abortion" language emerging from such a "candidate!"
Economically, Romney is a Big Government Statist! RomneyCare is is crowning glory!
"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party
over to the traitors in the battle just ended.
We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged
to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support.
Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates
wouldn’t make any sense at all.""
-- President Ronald Reagan
Mitt RomneyCARE (D, RINO): ”I'm very clear I think, to the people across the Commonwealth
my "R" didn't stand so much for Republican as it does for reform."
(Video, accessed 9/19/07)
"A political party cannot be all things to all people.
It must represent certain fundamental beliefs
which must not be compromised to political expediency
or simply to swell its numbers."
-- President Ronald Reagan
No, don’t mince words. How do you really feel?
Where is Ronald W. Reagan when we really need him???
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.